'-S- 



.** 



SOME REMINISCENCES 



By 
WILLIAM L. ROYALL 




New York and Washington 

THE NEALE PUBLISHING COMPANY 

1909 



V 



LIBRARY of CONGRESS 
Two CcDies Received 

MAh 18 1M09 

L.<^ Cuwn«(it Entry ^ 
COHY J. • 



Copyrighted, 1909, by 
THE NEALE PUBLISHING COMPANY 



CONTENTS 

CHAPTER PAGE 

I The War 9 

II Events in Richmond — Duelling 65 

III The State Debt — The Presidency .... 100 

IV The Trusts i54 

V Free Silver and Politics 195 



SOME REMINISCENCES 



CHAPTER I 



THE WAR 



I was born on November 15, 1844, at my 
father's place, Mount Ephraim, in the lower end 
of Fauquier County, Virginia. Our home was, in 
summer, the most beautiful place I have ever seen. 
It was a large brick house situated upon a com- 
manding bluff directly on the Rappahannock River, 
with broad low grounds directly in front and high 
bluffs heavily timbered upon the Culpeper side of 
the river, with the Blue Ridge Mountains looming 
up some forty miles away. We were comfortably 
well off, owning some fifteen slaves, a farm of one 
thousand acres, with enough money at interest to 
supply us with what the farm did not furnish. It 
was an ideal home and a happy one. 

My grandmother, who was Chief Justice Mar- 
shall's youngest sister, lived with us. When she 
was a young girl she married George Keith Taylor, 
a very distinguished lawyer of Petersburg, Vir- 
ginia. John Adams appointed him one of his 
midnight judges. I have always thought that 
those judicial appointments testify powerfully to 
the influence that John Marshall had even so early 



lo SOME REMINISCENCES 

as that. Adams appointed his brother-in-law one 
of these judges, his brother another, and gave the 
pkim to John himself. 

My grandmother was the most intellectual per- 
son that I have ever known. She lived in our fam- 
ily until 1867, when she died at the age of eighty- 
five, I was raised at her knee and she taught me 
all that I ever learned during the school period. 
Sir John Falstaff says, "If I know what the inside 
of a church is made of, I am a pepper-corn," I 
can say the same of a schoolhouse, I have never to 
this day seen the inside of one. My grandmother 
hated Thomas Jefferson as if he had been the 
Devil, and in that I have no doubt she reflected 
the views of the Chief Justice. But at any rate, 
she thought him the embodiment of all evil, I 
have heard her often denounce him as centering in 
himself all that was dangerous to the American 
people. Federalism versus Democracy. 

In i860 the people of Virginia were strongly in 
favor of the Union, But when Mr, Lincoln called 
for troops to coerce the States south of us, opinion 
in Virginia changed in the twinkling of an eye. 
The entire population became unanimous for sid- 
ing with the States to the south and resisting 
coercion to the death. 

In March, 1862, at the age of seventeen, I vol- 
unteered as a Confederate soldier, joining Com- 
pany A, Ninth Virginia Cavalry. From the foun- 



SOME REMINISCENCES ii 

dation of the colony Virginians have been devoted 
to fine horses, and in 1861 the State was as well 
supplied with throroughbred and partially thor- 
oughbred horses as with sheep and cattle. The 
half-bred horse is the best for a saddle horse. In 
the Confederate cavalry the men furnished their 
own horses, the government agreeing to pay for 
them if they were killed. The young men in Vir- 
ginia were all perfect horsemen, and mounted on 
their thoroughbred or half-bred horses they made 
a magnificent spectacle in regimental formation. 

My regiment was as fine as any in the Confed- 
erate service, and our colonel was Wm. H. F. Lee, 
a splendid officer, and son of Gen. Robert E. Lee. 
We were very proud of this. 

How the Confederate cavalry performed the 
feats it did perform in the early part of the war is 
more than I can comprehend, for not one company 
in ten had any arms that were fit to fight with. 
When I joined my company I was given a saber 
which I think was used in the Revolution, and this 
was the only weapon given me. One day in June, 
1862, while my regiment was standing in a road 
I bantered a comrade to see which of us could cut 
the largest twig from a tree. I made a powerful 
ait and the blade of my saber broke off at the hilt. 
In a short time we were dismounted and ordered to 
clear the Yankees out of a piece of woods in skir- 
mish formation. We marched through the woods. 



12 SOME REMINISCENCES 

but fortunately no Yankees were there. I have 
often wondered what I should have done, armed 
with that saber hilt, if I had met a Yankee armed 
with a Springfield musket. A comrade to whom I 
mentioned this said he knew what I would have 
done — I would have turned around and run like 
smoke, and I suspect he was right. 

I was in the Seven Days' battles around Rich- 
mond, in Second Manassas, in Sharpsburg or An- 
tietam, in Fredericksburg, and in Chancellorsville, 
besides, in that same time, in a hundred cavalry 
battles, many of which would have been called 
"great battles" in the Cuban war. 

I cannot help pausing to refer to one of these, 
the battle of Brandy Station or Fleetwood, on 
June 9, 1863. That was a fight to stir the heart 
of any soldier. Gen. J. E. B. Stuart, commander 
of the cavalry of Gen. Lee's army and in many re- 
spects the greatest cavalry soldier that ever lived, 
had collected all of his cavalry in the great plains 
that lie between Culpeper Court House and Brandy 
Station. The Confederate army was then engaged 
in the movement from Fredericksburg by way of 
Culpeper Court House to the Valley of Virginia to 
move forward to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. 

On June 7 Stuart ordered out his whole com- 
mand, more than eight thousand horsemen, to pass 
in review before Gen. Robert E. Lee. It was a 
noble sight, a sight that no one could ever forget. 



SOME REMINISCENCES 13 

Next morning Stuart was hastily summoned to 
move down to the Rappahannock River to face 
General Pleasanton, who was crossing with all the 
cavalry of the Army of the Potomac, supported by 
several brigades of infantry, in an effort to pene- 
trate the operations known to be going on in Gen- 
eral Lee's army. This resulted in an all-day battle 
on June 9 between the cavalry forces of the two 
armies. It was a great battle, nobly supported by 
both sides. One incident of it has remained viv- 
idly impressed upon my mind. Our colonel, W. 
H. F. Lee, had been promoted to brigadier-general, 
and my regiment was in his brigade. About 4 
o'clock in the afternoon Lee put himself at the 
head of my regiment which was at the foot of a 
hill out in the open field, standing in column of 
fours, and gave the order to charge up the hill, he 
riding at the head of the regiment. I was very 
near to the head of the column and could see all 
that took place. When we got to the summit of 
the hill, there, some two hundred yards awav, stood 
a long line of blue-coated cavalry. Lee did not 
hesitate an instant but dashed at the center of this 
line with his column of fours. The Yankees were 
of course cut in two at once, but each of their 
flanks closed in on our column, and then a most 
terrible affray with sabers and pistols took place. 
We got the best of it, and we had soon killed, 
wounded, or captured almost all of them. They 



14 SOME REMINISCENCES 

had a good many more men over beyond the hill, 
but the thing was over before the others could 
come to their assistance. 

We drew off back under the hill and then com- 
menced to take stock of the situation. It at once 
appeared that Capt. Tom Towson, captain of my 
company, was missing. The major of the regi- 
ment called for two volunteers from my company 
to go up on the hill and hunt for Captain Towson. 
Robert W. Monroe and myself rode out and said 
we would do it. We went up there in plain sight 
of the enemy, but seeing that we were on an errand 
of mercy not a shot was fired at us. We found 
Towson stone dead, and I brought him down be- 
fore the whole regiment across the neck of my 
horse. I mention this last incident because I have 
heard of a braggart member of my company telling 
that he and I did this thing, when Monroe and I 
did it. He saw me come down the hill with Tow- 
son, and long after the war, when he thought most 
of the witnesses were dead, he thought he would 
be safe in playing the hero of the event. 

This was the beginning of the movement to Get- 
tysburg. The infantry and artillery crossed the 
Blue Ridge range of mountains into the Valley of 
Virginia, and the cavalry remained upon the east- 
ern side of the mountains to mask the movement. 
We moved along up into the upper part of Fau- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 15 

quier and Loudoun counties. When we had got to 
Aldie in Loudoun County, General Pleasanton, at 
the head of all the cavalry of the Army of the Po- 
tomac, thought it was time for him to be looking 
into the case, and he attacked us furiously there. 
We had two or three days of tremendous cavalry 
battles, in which the success of each side was about 
the same, and many gallant men lost their lives. 
Finally Pleasanton drew off without having got up 
on the Blue Ridge Mountains to see what was go- 
ing on in the valley below. 

Then General Stuart marched off on what I have 
always thought the wildest of wild-goose chases. 
Why such a splendid soldier as Stuart should have 
done it passes my comprehension. Obviously the 
thing for him to do was to put himself upon Gen- 
eral Lee's right flank, between him and his enemy, 
to Inform General Lee, as far as possible, of what 
that enemy was doing. But Stuart marched away 
from Lee around the Army of the Potomac, and 
was entirely lost to Lee for a week or more. If 
any one will take a map of Virginia, Mai7land,and 
Pennsylvania and trace Stuart's course I feel confi- 
dent he will be amazed at it. When he saw that 
Pleasanton had abandoned his attempt to interfere 
with Lee, Stuart was near Paris Gap In Fauquier 
County. He set out and marched straight to 
Brentsville In Prince William County, thence he 
Struck out for the Potomac at Rowson's Ford, near 



i6 SOME REMINISCENCES 

Rockville, Maryland, and from there to Hanover, 
Pennsylvania, where he had a severe battle with 
the enemy's cavalry, and thence he made his way 
to Gettysburg, where he joined General Lee on the 
second day of the battle. 

I consider myself qualified to speak as an expert 
on the battle of Gettysburg. I became so qualified 
in this manner: In 1895 I was the editorial writer 
of the Richmond Times. In one of my articles I 
spoke of the unparalleled heroism of Pickett's 
charge of Virginians at Gettysburg. Some North 
Carolinians took me up on this and said I was as- 
cribing to Virginians credit that belonged to North 
Carolinians. I was very much shocked at this, and 
for two reasons. I had always understood that 
Pickett's Virginians had carried off the honors of 
the day, and I did not like to see these honors torn 
from my fellow Virginians. Again, the idea of 
having done an injustice to my comrades from 
North Carolina stung me very acutely. I resolved 
therefore to study Gettysburg and find out the 
facts. I got the records and carefully studied 
every line that had been written about it, and at the 
end I felt that I knew my ground and could speak 
with confidence upon every phase of the battle. I 
accordingly wrote an address upon the battle, and 
the Confederate Army and Navy Society of Mary- 
land coming to know of it, invited me to deliver it 
before them in Baltimore and I did so on the even- 
ing of January 20, 1896. 



SOME REMINISCENCES 17 

I have received two compliments upon this ad- 
dress which I prize very highly. I sent a copy of 
it to Lord Wolseley, at that time commander-in- 
chief of the English army, and he wrote me a very 
nice letter about it, in which he asked me to let him 
have it published in the United Service Magazine, 
the mouthpiece of the English Army and Navy. 
It can be readily imagined that I gave my consent, 
and it was published in that magazine for April 
and May, 1897, but was credited to W. S. Reyall, 
First Virginia Cavali^ — the glory of war, to have 
your leg shot off and have your name misspelled 
in the Gazette ! 

The other compliment was this. The late his- 
torian, John C. Ropes of Boston, was an intimate 
friend of Capt. W. Gordon McCabe of Richmond. 
Shortly before his death he paid McCabe a visit 
of several weeks, and myself and Judge James 
Keith, Chief Justice of Virginia, called upon him. 
Ropes had read my address, and he spoke to 
me of it in very complimentary terms, saying he 
had filed it away amongst his choicest pamphlets 
for future use and reference. When Judge Keith 
and I told Ropes that we had both served as pri- 
vates in the Confederate Army, and that all of our 
fellows had done the same, he was immensely sur- 
prised and said that fact gave him more informa- 
tion about the Confederate armies than all he had 
ever read. 



i8 SOME REMINISCENCES 

What I am going to say now about Gettysburg 
in a condensed form can be seen in detail in 
that address, with reference to official documents 
to sustain every statement. Incidentally I will say 
here that General Lee was considerably outmatched 
in the battle. He had 62,000 men while General 
Meade had 105,000. 

The absence of General Lee's cavalry caused 
the battle to come on through pure accident, and 
without any preparations or plans for it. Heth's 
division of Hill's corps having arrived near Get- 
tysburg on July I, undertook to march into the 
town to get some shoes. Just outside the town they 
met Buford's division of Federal cavalry, and a 
brisk skirmish commenced. The rest of Hill's 
corps was steadily arriving and Ewell's corps, re- 
turning from York, commenced arriving at the 
same time. On the Union side the First and Elev- 
enth Corps were up, and they joined with Buford 
in repelling the attack, so that in a short time there 
was a very brisk action in progress between from 
twenty to twenty-five thousand men on each side. 
The battle was splendidly fought on both sides, 
but ended in a complete triumph for the Confed- 
erates, the First and Eleventh Corps being almost 
destroyed. There were not more than six thousand 
of these two corps available for duty when the 
battle was over. 

General Lee arrived upon the field just at the 



SOME REMINISCENCES 19 

conclusion of the battle, and saw the remnants 
of the First and Eleventh Corps scampering over 
the hills behind Gettysburg. While he was stand- 
ing in the field watching this interesting spectacle 
General Longstreet rode up and reported. On 
being asked how near his corps was he replied that 
he could have two divisions, Hood's and McLaw's, 
up for business by daylight next morning, but that 
Pickett's division was nearly a day's march behind. 
General Lee told him then and there to get his 
men up as quickly as possible, as he intended to 
attack the enemy next morning at daylight if he 
was there. 

The situation next morning, July 2, was this. 
The Twelfth Corps of the Union army arrived 
during the night and went into line at Meade's ex- 
treme right on Gulp's Hill. Their line was ex- 
tended round the curve by the remnants of the 
First and Eleventh Corps and there was nothing 
else from their left to Round Top. About eight 
thousand of the Third Corps arrived at General 
Meade's left during the night and went in bivouac. 
This was the whole Federal force on the field for a 
battle at early morn on the second. They made 
about twenty-five thousand men, with an unfilled 
gap in their line between Round Top and the left 
of the Eleventh Corps. 

What was General Lee's situation? All of 
Hill's and Ewell's corps were up and in line, and 



20 SOME REMINISCENCES 

two-thirds of Longstreet's corps were near enough 
to be in Hne at dayHght. In some way Lee had 
become possessed of the information that but a 
small part of Meade's army had arrived at Gettys- 
burg, and he determined to attack them at daylight 
on the morning of the 2nd. He gave the neces- 
sary orders to Ewell and Hill, and having person- 
ally told Longstreet on the afternoon of the ist to 
get his command up by light next morning, he 
rested on his oars waiting for Longstreet's men to 
arrive. Next morning he was up and had break- 
fast when day broke. About light Longstreet ar- 
rived with his two divisions and Lee ordered him 
to get ready and attack Meade's line between 
Round Top and Gettysburg. But as Pickett was 
not up Longstreet did not want to make the attack, 
so he entered into a warm argument with Lee in an 
endeavor to persuade him to postpone the attack. 
He upset Lee's resolution and caused the attack to 
be postponed until four in the afternoon, at which 
time all of General Meade's army was up, and the 
whole advantage that had accrued to the Confed- 
erates from the situation in the morning had dis- 
appeared. General Longstreet is responsible, there- 
fore, for General Lee's failing to inflict an awful 
disaster on General Meade on the morning of July 
2, perhaps the utter destruction of his army. If 
Longstreet had done what Lee wanted, the 
Twelfth Corps, the remnants of the First and 



SOME REMINISCENCES 21 

Eleventh Corps, and the two divisions of the 
Third Corps would have been routed by 5 o'clock. 
The Second, Hancock's force, arrived on the field 
of battle at 7 A. m. and it would, of course, have 
been routed in a very short time. The Fifth 
Corps began to arrive at 8 A. M. and it would have 
met the same fate. The Sixth did not begin to ar- 
rive until the afternoon, so that Lee would have 
fought Meade's army by fragments with the whole 
of his own army. The result of such a conflict 
cannot be a matter of doubt. General Longstreet, 
therefore, by his contumacy (the word is not too 
strong) lost the Confederates the battle of Gettys- 
burg on July 2. He equally lost it for them on 
July 3, but before showing this there is an outside 
matter I wish to relate. 

General Longstreet did not attack until 4 p. M., 
July 2. But when he did attack he fought one of 
the most splendid battles that ever was fought. 
Longstreet was a great soldier on the field of 
battle. His defect was obstinacy and procrastina- 
tion, but when once engaged all of that generally 
disappeared and he was usually as prompt and 
fiery as Stonewall Jackson himself. On the after- 
noon of July 2 he handled his adversaries so 
roughly that they were very glad when nightfall 
came on. 

Now General Meade had never been satisfied 
with the position at Gettysburg. He was in posi- 



22 SOME REMINISCENCES 

tions forced on him by chance and never selected 
by him. During the night of July 2 he called a 
council of war of his chief generals and told them 
plainly that he thought the army should abandon 
its position and get to another nearer its base of 
supplies. It is said that a majority of the generals 
wanted to stay there and fight it out but the last 
thing Meade said to them was, "This is no place 
to fight a battle." Whilst he was in this hesitating 
mood an Incident occurred that determined him to 
stay at Gettysburg and fight it out. 

When General Lee started on his trip to Gettys- 
burg he wrote Mr. Davis urging that every soldier 
that could be spared in other parts of the Confeder- 
acy should be collected at Culpeper Court House 
under the command of General Beauregard to 
make a threatening demonstration against Wash- 
ington. Even "the effigy of an army" (his words) 
with Beauregard's name attached to it would afford 
him great relief. General Lee was so intent upon 
this that the last thing he did before crossing the 
Potomac was to write another letter to Mr. Davis 
urging that this should be done. 

There was every reason in the world why Mr. 
Davis should have done what General Lee asked. 
In the first place it was obviously the right thing 
to do. In the second place, General Lee wanted it 
done and whatever he wanted done should have 
been done if it were possible to do it. He was 



SOME REMINISCENCES 23 

undertaking one of the great events in the world's 
history with means utterly inadequate to the end, 
and whatever he asked for in the way of assistance 
should have been given him if it were possible. 
The student of the records will find that there were 
35,000 soldiers and 125 guns along the coast that 
could have been easily put at Culpeper Court 
House before July i, as I show further on. It was 
inexcusable in Mr. Davis to make no effort to 
carry out General Lee's wish. Instead of doing 
this, he wrote General Lee telling him it was im- 
possible to do what he wished, and trusted it to a 
single cavalryman to carry it through a hostile 
country to General Lee. 

One of the leakiest things in the world was the 
Confederate War Office, and Lee had hardly asked 
for this force to be put at Culpeper Court House 
before it was known in Washington, and Meade 
fought the first two days' battles with the fear of 
an attack upon his rear haunting him. Ulric 
Dahlgren, son of the Admiral, was an adventurous 
young captain of twenty-one on Meade's staff. 
While the battle was in progress he, with a small 
command, was scouting in rear of the Confederate 
army, and he fell in with Mr. Davis's courier in 
the streets of Greencastle and searched him and 
got his letter. On reading the letter he saw the im- 
portance of getting it to General Meade, and so 
he rode hard and handed it to him just as the 



24 SOME REMINISCENCES 

council of war ended. The probabilities all are that 
Meade was going to change his position at Gettys- 
burg, leaving the Confederates the moral effect of 
a great victory gained there, but that this informa- 
tion relieving him from all fear as to his rear, de- 
termined him to stay there and fight the third day's 
battle. 

General Longstreet caused the Confederates to 
lose the third day's battle by not carrying out Gen- 
eral Lee's orders to him. Lee directed that artillery 
should be sent in front of the infantry that charged 
the Federal line. If this had been done the terrific 
artillery fire that decimated Pickett's division 
would all have fallen on this artillery, and when 
Pickett's division got to the stone wall, instead of 
being a mere fragment of itself it would have been 
in full force. As it was, it cut through the Federal 
line. What might not have been the result if it 
had been united with Anderson's division directly 
behind it as General Lee expected would be the 
case, to make good what It had won? But to 
understand all this my lecture must be read as 
printed. 

There is one curious thing about this matter. 
The North Carolinians say they went farthest 
at Gettysburg. But General Longstreet says in 
his official report that they went to pieces under the 
artillery fire in crossing the field and that their 
principal losses were incurred In quitting their 
work. 



SOME REMINISCENCES 25 

Before leaving the war there are one or two 
phases and Incidents of it that I wish to record. 
I missed Gettysburg, and how I missed it opens up 
a much debated question and that question is, 
whether or not General J. E. B. Stuart is to blame 
for not being there with General Lee when he ar- 
rived there. My good friend. Colonel John S. 
Mosby, the famous partisan ranger, has written a 
great deal, and especially a most interesting book 
recently published, to prove that Stuart was not to 
blame for not being there, and that his absence 
caused no injury to Lee. Notwithstanding all he 
has said, however, I, for one, am of the opinion 
that Stuart ought to have crossed the Potomac at 
Shepherdstown and ridden on Lee's right flank 
all the way. The man is a fool that contends that 
Stuart disobeyed orders in riding around the Fed- 
eral army. General Lee's orders to him plainly 
permitted him to do this, but the point is that 
Stuart ought not to have exercised the discretion 
conferred upon him. His hard horse sense ought to 
have told him to stick to Lee. That was the place 
where he was wanted. But what I want to point 
out is that the criticism of Stuart is really not criti- 
cism. It is a lamentation that so great and power- 
ful a man as he was was not at Lee's right hand to 
counsel and advise with him about what was best 
to be done. 

While Lee was moving down the Valley of Vir- 



26 SOME REMINISCENCES 

ginia with Hooker absolutely perplexed about his 
whereabouts, as I have said before, Pleasanton 
took it into his head to ride up to the top of the 
Blue Ridge Mountains at Ashby's Gap and take a 
peep over in the valley to see if Lee was really 
there. But when he got to Aldie and Middleburg 
he encountered Jeb Stuart and his cavalry right 
there for the purpose of preventing Mr. Pleasan- 
ton from doing that identical thing. There was 
tremendous fighting there for two or three days, 
Stuart gradually falling back to the mountains; 
but after awhile Pleasanton resolved to give it up. 
Stuart then determined to exercise the discretion 
that Lee had conferred upon him. He determined 
to ride around Hooker's army, between him and 
Washington City. He started straight from Ash- 
by's Gap toward Brentville, some twenty or thirty 
miles. The roads there are limestone pikes. My 
horse having lost all of his shoes, he became so 
lame, on these limestone pikes, that he could not 
travel at all. I reported his condition to my com- 
manding officer and asked him what I should do. 
He told me to fall out of ranks and go to a black- 
smith's shop and get him shod, and then to follow 
along as best I could. I did this, and then rode 
over into the Valley of Virginia to follow in 
General Lee's track, but before I reached the army 
the battle of Gettysburg had been fought. I do 
not know, of course, how many men this ride cost 



SOME REMINISCENCES 27 

Stuart, but it is obvious that there may have been 
many in my fix. 

I have been very harsh in my criticisms of Gen- 
eral Longstreet for his part in the battle of Gettys- 
burg, but it would be a mistake to suppose that 
Longstreet was always an inefficient soldier. Upon 
the contrary, when once engaged in battle there 
have been few more superb soldiers than he, I 
got that splendid gentleman and gallant soldier, 
Col. Wm. H. Palmer, who was Gen. A. P. Hill's 
chief of staff, to write me the following account of 
what he witnessed of General Longstreet's conduct 
in the battle of the Wilderness on May 6, 1864. 
This shows Longstreet at his best, and shows what 
a magnificent soldier he was upon the field of 
battle. He saved the day then, and if he had not 
been shot down by his own men at the critical mo- 
ment Grant's army would probably have been de- 
stroyed, tangled up in that wilderness as it was. 
Colonel Palmer's letter is as follows : 

Richmond, Va., May 11, igoS. 
Mr. W. L. Royall, Richmond, Va. 

Dear Sir: I will endeavor to repeat a conversation 
had with you as to some of the occurrences of the first 
and second days of the battle of the Wilderness that came 
under my observation. 

We liad full notice of General Grant's movement from 
around Culpeper C. H. General Longstreet's First 
Corps vva'; near Gordonsvllle (lately returned from East 
Tennessee), General A. P. Hill's Third Corps was 



28 SOME REMINISCENCES 

around Orange C. H., and General Ewell's Second Corps 
to the right of Orange C. H. General Hill moved on 
the plank road below Verdierville, with Heth's and Wil- 
cox's divisions on the 4th of May, Anderson's division be- 
ing left at Orange C. H. to protect our trains and rear. 
Ewell moved below Verdierville on our left, on the old 
Brock road. 

Our orders on the 5th were to attack and press the 
enemy. I remember that our troops as they passed be- 
yond the lines erected the previous winter at Mine Run, 
which they expected to occupy as before, exclaimed, 
"Mars Bob is going for them this time," and the poor 
fellows cheered as they pressed forward. About a mile 
beyond we came to a heavy line of dismounted cavalry. 
They were picked men and hard to move. We had to 
thicken our skirmish line. The enemy's officers behaved 
with the greatest gallantry, on horseback encouraging the 
men, and exposing themselves to hold their line; finally 
they gave way. We captured a number of men, and many 
fine horses, and moved some distance below Parker's store 
while waiting for Heth's division to form, as we could 
not drive them farther with skirmishers, and had left the 
infantry. Generals Lee, Hill, and Stuart rested in a large 
field on the left of the road (Trapp's farm). Suddenly a 
force of the enemy, in skirmishing order, came out of the 
woods on the left. General Lee walked rapidly off to- 
ward Heth's troops, calling for Colonel Taylor, his adju- 
tant-general. General Stuart stood up and looked the 
danger squarely in the face; General Hill remained as he 
was. We were within pistol shot, when to our surprise 
the Federal officer gave the command "right about" and 
disappeared in the timber, as much alarmed at finding 
himself in the presence of Confederate troops as we were 
at their unexpected appearance. 

A little after 3 o'clock General Heth was attacked 



SOME REMINISCENCES 29 

furiously. Wilcox's command, part of which had been 
sent into the interval between Ewell on the Brock road 
(and into which the skirmishers above described had 
penetrated), was recalled and gradually put into action, 
the Federals attacking at short intervals furiously, all con- 
cealed by the thick woods and underbrush. The roar of 
musketry was incessant, and was not relieved by any 
artillery fire, nothing but deadly musketry. We had had 
five of these heavy atacks. General Hill had moved six- 
teen guns of Poague's and Mcintosh's battalions into the 
large field (Trapp's farm) on the left of the road, and 
close to the infantr>^ line. His attention was called to the 
fact that there was no road by which the guns could be 
moved if our infantry line should be driven .back. He 
answered that he knew this, but in battle the guns must 
take their chances of capture, and would help to hold the 
line if the emergency pointed out should occur. The 
guns were not used during the day. Near nightfall the 
sixth heavy attack, bearing heavily on our extreme right, 
commenced — a turning movement. General Hill exposed 
himself to encourage the men, and sent me for the last 
brigade he had in reserve, Lane's. I found General Lane 
putting his men in a weak spot some distance to the left, 
where help had been called for, and part of his brigade 
already engaged. He hesitated for a moment only, and 
upon my urgent demand as from General Hill, he fol- 
lowed to the extreme right, where he put his troops in, as 
he always did, in perfect order and effectively stayed the 
threatened danger. I hurried back to the point from 
which he had been taken, and found it safe. As I passed 
the plank road General Stuart and Colonel Venable were 
sitting on their horses listening to the increased roar of 
battle on the extreme right, and one of them exclaimed, 
"If night would only come!" I explained that the in- 
creased roar of battle came from Lane's brigade going in. 



30 SOME REMINISCENCES 

and that they were such steady troops that we felt that 
they could not be driven off before nightfall, and Colonel 
Venable rode off to say as much to General Lee. Still 
later there was an alarm from the extreme left, the enemy 
pushing into the interval between Ewell and ourselves. 
There was nothing out of the line except the Fifth 
Alabama Battalion (125 strong) under Major Vande- 
graff, who had charge of the prisoners. They went in 
with a cheer, and whatever w^as before them was driven 
back, and night settled down on the dreadful field — our 
lines all held. 

It was estimated from the prisoners we had from 
different commands that Hill's two divisions of about 
15,000 had held their ground in the six attacks against 
40,000 men. General Ewell sent word to General Hill 
that he had heard his battle, and congratulated him on 
his success. 

A small fire was made close to the line, and near the 
right gun of Poague's battalion, for the headquarters of the 
Third Corps in the field so often referred to, and soon 
Generals Heth and Wilcox came for orders. They said 
their lines in the woods were like a worm fence, at every 
angle, and when they had undertaken to straighten them 
the enemy had captured our men and we captured theirs. 
General Hill told them that General Lee's orders were 
to let the men rest as they were; that General Long- 
street would be up by, or soon after, midnight, and would 
form in the rear of the line before daylight ; and to let the 
men of the Third Corps fall back after Longstreet's troops 
were in position — Longstreet's troops in the first line for 
the next day, Anderson's division of the Third Corps and 
the other divisions forming a second line. 

After midnight General Hill rode to Parker's store to 
see what news General Lee had of Longstreet. General 
Wilcox also rode to Parker's store. General Lee repeated 
his orders. 



SOME REMINISCENCES 31 

What could be done toward straightening our line was 
done, and the anxious night wore slowly away. The 
men had marched and fought all day of the fifth, and 
slept the sleep of exhaustion on the ground as the battle 
left them at 9 o'clock at night. We could not sleep, 
but waited for news of Longstreet ; for we knew that 
at the first blush of the morning the turning attack on 
our right would open with overwhelming numbers, and, 
unsupported, the men must give way. 

As soon as it was light General Hill rode to the left to 
examine the ground in the interval between General 
Ewell's troops and his, leaving me at the fire by the right 
gun of Poague's battalion. Shortly after he left I looked 
across the field and saw General Longstreet loping his 
horse across the open. I had served in his brigade with 
the First Virginia Infantry, and knew him well, but had 
not seen him since his Chickamauga and Knoxville cam- 
paign. As I grasped his hand I said, "Ah, General, we 
have been looking for you since 12 o'clock last night. 
We expect to be attacked at any moment, and are not in 
any shape to resist." His answer, "My troops are not 
up, I have ridden ahead," was drowned in a roar of 
musketry. He rode off to form his troops in the road, and 
in a moment General Hill returned, and together we rode 
to the main road. As far as we could see the road was 
crowded with the enemy moving forward ; our troops 
slowly and in order retiring, except just at the road, where 
they were holding fast. General Hill directed me to ride 
to the guns, and to order them to fire obliquely across the 
road. McGowan's brigade were for the most part 
through the guns and forming behind them. There were 
a few of our troops in front. General Hill said it could 
not be delayed, the guns must open. The sixteen guns 
firing, the last one reaching the enemy far in rear, did 
great execution, as the road was packed with Federal 



32 SOME REMINISCENCES 

troops. It was unexpected, as no artillery had been used 
the day before, except one gun in the road, which was 
soon silenced by the enemy's skirmishers. It enabled us 
to hold at the road, and soon the Texas brigade of Long- 
street's corps filed behind the guns, and as they moved 
into position General Longstreet rode down the line, his 
horse at a walk, and addressing each company said, "Keep 
cool, men, we will straighten this out in a short time — 
keep cool." In the midst of the confusion his coolness and 
manner was inspiring. When the Texas brigade had 
formed they were moved through the guns. General Lee 
rode on their flank. The tall Texan on the left lifted his 
hat and called to General Lee to go back, and it was 
taken up by the others. General Lee lifted his hat to 
them, and moved slowly to the rear. It did not strike me 
as remarkable at the time. The brigade was noted for 
steadiness and courage, and had been detached from him. 
It had been months since he had seen them. There was 
no heroic leading. He was glad to be with them ; he was 
saluting them. When the Texans moved forward General 
Longstreet had no time to form more troops in front ; he 
halted and faced his men as they were marching in the 
road, and broke by brigades and moved them in echelon 
to meet the turning movement of the enemy. It was a 
beautiful movement. The Texans, part of McGowan's 
and much of Davis's Mississippi brigade under Colonel 
Stone and other troops of Heth and Wilcox, were holding 
all the ground around the guns, and to their right across 
the road ; and General Longstreet's echelon movement 
caught the sweeping enemy and forced them back steadily 
and surely.* In a short time he was master of the field, 

* I am referring to the movement of the first moments of con- 
tact. Later, Kershaw's division was stretched out on the right, 
and Field's division on the left of the plank road, Anderson's 
division of the Third Corps supporting. The long interval next 
to Ewell was protected by Heth's and Wilcox's divisions of the 



SOME REMINISCENCES 33 

and everybody felt that way about it. Nothing finer was 
ever done on a battlefield. Of course, we of the two 
divisions of the Third Corps were sore — after putting 
up such a battle the day before, to have to be found by 
Longstreet's troops retiring, and in more or less confu- 
sion was dreadful. They did not know anything about 
their slowness in getting to the field. They only knew 
that with conspicuous courage and steadiness they had 
redeemed a losing battle, and saved the Army of 
Northern Virginia from disaster. It was an inspiring 
homecoming for the First Corps. 

General Hill, with the part of Heth's and Wilcox's 
divisions not engaged, moved to the left in the interval 
between his troops and Ewell's to a second large field, 
screened from the field in which the guns were by a strip 
of woods. Before the troops came up we rode to a house 
and outbuildings in the lower end of the field and dis- 
mounted. We had been there only a short while when 
we were startled by the breaking down of a fence just 
below, and in plain view was a long line of Federal in- 
fantry clearing the fence to move forw-ard. General Hill 
commanded, "Mount, walk your horses, and don't look 
back." When near our troops he directed me to ride to 
General Lee and say if Anderson's division had arrived he 
wanted a brigade of that division sent to him. Anderson's 
division had just arrived. (Longstreet being late, had the 
road, and Anderson's division of the Third Corps could 
not reach us until all of Longstreet's troops w^ere out of 
it.) The roar of musketry was far extended as I asked for 
the brigade, and General Lee said, "Well, let's! see Gen- 
Third Army Corps. General Longstreet had for the 6th of May 
battle on the right about twenty-one thousand enlisted men. In 
the battle of the 5th of May on the same ground General A. P. 
Hill had only Heth's and Wilcox's divisions, about fifteen thou- 
sand men, the interval on our left being unoccupied and a source 
of anxiety all the afternoon. 



34 SOME REMINISCENCES 

eral Longstreet about it." When we got near him, 
General Lee said, "General Hill wants one of Anderson's 
brigades." General Longstreet said to me, "Certainly, 
Colonel; which one will you take?" I said, "The lead- 
ing one," and hurried back with it ; and General Hill 
at once attacked the force and broke it up, capturing many 
prisoners. As I passed a group of prisoners an officer 
asked, "Were you not at the house a short time ago?" 
I told him, "Yes." He abused his officers and said, "I 
wanted to fire on you, but my colonel said 3'ou were 
farmers riding from the house." Later I rode back 
(everything being quiet on our line) to the plank road, 
and shook hands with General Jenkins, of the South 
Carolina brigade, with whom I had been associated, and 
who I had not seen since the Chickamauga and East 
Tennessee campaign of the First Corps. Just at this time 
General Longstreet, continuing his counter-turning move- 
ment, had launched Mahone's, Wofford's, and Anderson's 
brigades on the extreme left of the enemy, under the 
general direction of Colonel Sorrell, his adjutant-general 
and chief of staff. It was in every way successful, and 
part of Mahone's brigade reached the plank road in 
front. As General Longstreet rode forward. General 
Jenkins accompanying him, both were shot by our own 
men; Jenkins being killed, also Captain Dobie, and 
Orderly Bowen, of Kershaw's staff. It is hard to supply 
the place of any general in direct charge of a battle, but 
especially difficult in a tangled wilderness, in which we 
were fighting. General Lee directed that the lines be 
straightened, and we did not attack again until nearly 4 
o'clock p. m., when a part of the enemy's line at the 
Brock road was carried, but not held; and night settled 
again on the dreadful battlefield. 

We had thrown up good works along our whole line 
on the evening of the 6th and morning of the 7th. Davis's 



SOME REMINISCENCES 3s 

Mississippi brigade, under Colonel Stone, who had held 
their ground, and fought with Longstreet's troops, were 
drawn from the line on the evening of the 6th, and formed 
in the Trapp field near the guns, and were complimented 
and thanked with earnestness and emotion by General A. 
P. Hill. 

Late on the 7th General Lee rode over to our line, 
Heth's and Wilcox's divisions covering the interval be- 
tween Longstreet's left and Ewell's right, and had a 
conference with General Hill in the porch of the house. 
From the roof some shingles had been broken out, and 
we had a fine marine glass, and could see clearly the open 
ground around Wilderness tavern over the tops of the 
trees. From the constant stream of couriers and officers 
we felt assured that it was General Grant's headquarters 
in our view. In a field near the headquarters was a large 
park of heavy guns, and as I looked these guns moved 
into the road and took the road to our right, their left. I 
went down and reported the movement and direction 
taken by these heavy guns. It was no doubt simply con- 
firmatory of numerous other reports from the cavalry and 
other points of the line, that General Grant was moving 
to Spottsylvania C. H. Orders were at once given for 
the all-night march of Kershaw's and Field's brigades, 
General Longstreet's division, now under the command of 
General R. H. Anderson. The Third Army Corps moved 
on the same route on the 8th of May, passing through the 
burning woods, in which many a poor soul perished from 
fire, who had escaped death from his wounds. We had a 
small engagement with the enemy on our march, the 
enemy pushing a force from near Todd's tavern. They 
were moved from our path by the brigade skirmishers of 
Mahone's brigade, a splendid body of sharpshooters. 
General Early was now in command of the Third Army 
Corps, General Hill being sick, but he followed in his 
ambulance. 



36 SOME REMINISCENCES 

We reached what was to be the still bloodier field of 
Spottsylvania C. H. early on the 9th of May. 

Yours truly, 
Wm. H. Palmer. 

In his history of the Army of the Potomac 
Swinton says the Federals were at a complete loss 
to understand why Longstreet's overpowering rush 
was suspended, and after mentioning that he was 
shot by his own men, he adds a footnote to page 
434 as follows: 

"General Longstreet stated to the writer that he saw 
they were his own men, but in vain shouted to them to 
cease firing. He also expressed with great emphasis his 
opinion of the decisive blow he would have inflicted had he 
not been wounded. 'I thought,' said he, 'that we had 
another Bull Run on you, for I had made my dispositions 
to seize the Brock road.' " 

It certainly looks as if Providence had deter- 
mined that we should not succeed. Look at the 
facts. Albert Sydney Johnston stricken down at 
Shiloh just as he was about to inflict a death-wound 
upon his enemy; Joseph E. Johnston, at Seven 
Pines, Stonewall Jackson, at Chancellorsville, and 
General Longstreet at the Wilderness. 

It has been generally supposed that Lee had 
in his Gettysburg campaign the finest army that 
he ever commanded. He had veteran troops, 
it is true, troops that had become accustomed to co- 
operating with each other, and so far as that goes 



SOME REMINISCENCES 37 

to make a fine army, his army was up to a high 
mark. But his troops had been starved and frozen 
until men and beasts had wasted much of their 
strength, and they were far from possessing that 
stamina, physical and moral, which naturally be- 
longed to them. 

My excellent friend, Col. Wm. H. Palmer, of 
Richmond, already quoted from, has made from 
the War Records the following most interesting 
summary of events shown by the recorcis that bear 
upon that subject. It also shows what a large 
body of troops were within reach for Mr. Davis 
to utilize in placing the army at Culpeper Court 
House that General Lee wanted formed there. 
What would not have happened if these 35,000 
veteran troops had been put at Culpeper Court 
House under Beauregard? Colonel Palmer per- 
mits me to Insert his paper here. 

War Records, Series I, Vol. XXV, Part 11. Corres- 
pondence, Serial Number 40. 

CHANCELLORSVILLE. 

R. E. Lee, March 27, 1863, to James A. Seddon, Secre- 
tary of War, (page 687) : His army not supplied with 
food. 

R. E. Lee, March 2g, 1863, to Seddon, {page 691) : 
Scouts on duty ordered away by Department without 
his knowledge. 

R. E. Lee, April i, 1863, to Gen. W. N. Pendleton, 
(page 697) : Tells him to have his artillery horses 
"grazed and browsed" in the absence of long forage. 



3 8 SOME REMINISCENCES 

R. E. Lee, April i6, 1863, to President Davis, {page 
725) : Unable to bring his army together for want of 
subsistence and forage. 

R. E. Lee, April 17, 1863, to Seddon, {page 7 30) : 
Army failing in health because of insufficient rations — 
1/4 lb. ^acon, 18 oz. flour, 10 lbs. rice to each lOO men 
every third day. Will break down when called upon 
for exertion. 

I internapt Colonel Palmer's narrative at this 
point to insert the following on my own account. 
The letter of General Lee to the Secretary of War 
of March 27, 1863, referred to above, is too im- 
portant not to be quoted. He says : 

The troops of this portion of the army have for some 
time been confined to reduced rations, consisting of eigh- 
teen ounces of flour, four ounces of bacon of indifferent 
quality with occasional supplies of rice, sugar and 
molasses. The men are cheerful and I receive but few 
complaints; still I do not think it enough to continue them 
in health and vigor, and I fear that they will be unable to 
endure the hardships of the approaching campaign. 
Symptoms of scurvy are appearing among them, and 
to supply the place of vegetables each regiment is directed 
to send a daily detail to gather sassafras buds, wild 
onions, garlic, lambs-quarter and poke sprouts, but for 
so large an army the supply obtained is very small. I 
have understood, but I do not know with what truth, 
that the Army of the West and that in the department of 
South Carolina and Georgia are more bountifully supplied 
with provisions. I have also heard that the troops in 
North Carolina receive one half pound of bacon per day. 
I think this army deserves as much consideration as either 



SOME REMINISCENCES 39 

of those named, and if it can be supplied, respectfully ask 
that it shall be similarly provided. 

This letter was referred by the Secretary of 
War to L. B. Northrup, Commissary-General of 
Subsistence, and he made the following reply to It : 

April I, 1863. 

The reduction of the meat ration in General Lee's 
army was mainly due to local causes, that of transporta- 
tion being chief, as will appear by the following en- 
dorsement on a letter received from J. H. Claiborne, com- 
missary of subsistence: 

Richmond, March 28, 1863 

Respectfully referred to the Secretary of War, with a 
statement of Mr. Hottel, my transportation agent. This 
paper I directed to be prepared for the purpose of showing 
the inadequacy of the transportation for bringing even 
the rough articles of meat, the sugar on hand and to hand 
since the 13th of December having been used as a sub- 
stitute for bacon. This condition requires an instant 
remedy. Mr. Hottel suggests one, viz: to reduce the 
passenger trains one half. 

Major W. H. Smith, from Raleigh, reports the 
depots blocked up at three points, and the railroad men 
prefer private freight, which they say pays better. 

This army is living from hand to mouth as to meat 
and bread, due to a want of means to get both meat 
and wheat brought to market. Railroads worn out, 
horses killed up, all obstacles beyond the reach of the 
commissary-general of subsistence. 

Dr. Cartwright in a lengthy report on the reduction of 
the meat ration (which was referred to this bureau by the 
President) urges that it be done on sanitary grounds. 



40 SOME REMINISCENCES 

The appearance of the men of General Lee's army 
and their health confirms the opinion of Dr. Cartwright, 
as to diminishing the ration, and it is recommended that 
the bacon and pork rations be reduced to one fourth of 
a pound throughout the army. 

Well, well, well ! Does not that outdo anything 
that was ever heard of? Here Is General Lee tell- 
ing the Department that his soldiers are starving, 
but with a heroism never shown before are making 
no complaint; that he Is trying to eke out their 
meager rations by making them gather sassafras 
buds and wild onions — grazing them along with 
the cattle — and the Department replies he must 
not feed his men too high, or they will get fat, 
sleek and lazy! What Is to be thought of that? 

But that Is not all. Commissary-General North- 
rup adds In this same communication that if a suf- 
ficiently strong military guard Is furnished him he 
thinks he can glean something out of the counties 
of Fauquier, Loudoun, Culpeper, and Madison, 
Virginia, which had been the camping-ground of 
the two aiTnies during all the war. They were rich 
counties and they were near at hand and conveni- 
ent, and the people had hidden a little from the 
Federal armies, and if he had soldiers sent with 
him he thought he could drag out of those deso- 
lated counties a little more. This correspondence 
furnishes a key to the Incompetency of the Con- 
federate civil administration In all directions. In- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 41 

stead of grappling with the difficulties of the case 
at the source they were treated as weak men al- 
ways treat exigencies, weak substitutes were re- 
sorted to where there should have been nothing but 
positive and energetic action. Instead of the 
forcible seizure of such trains as were necessary to 
bring food to the army, we have an imbecile essay 
upon the peril of soldiers getting fat and lazy if 
fed too high, and a suggestion that as the four 
counties named might be drained of something 
more, resort had better be had to them. 

This correspondence furnishes a clue to the 
whole civil administration of the Confederacy. 
This inefficiency went on dragging the Confederate 
soldier's condition down until it became pitiable in 
the last degree. General Lee's army became so 
ragged it could scarcely be said to be clothed at 
all, and to a great extent it was without shoes. 
The men received rations that were actually not 
enough to keep body and soul together, but they 
remained patiently at their posts fighting odds of 
two or three to one every day, never murmuring, 
never complaining. 

I quote in this connection the following passage 
from the autobiography of Gen. Benjamin F. But- 
ler (page 610). Speaking of the conditions ex- 
isting in the Confederate Army in the summer of 
1864 he says: 



42 SOME REMINISCENCES 

In the matter of starvation, the fact is incontestible 
that a soldier in our army would have quite easily starved 
on the rations which, in the latter days of the war, were 
served out to the Confederate soldiers before Petersburg. 
I examined the haversacks of many Confederate soldiers 
captured on picket, during the summer of 1864, and 
found therein, as their rations for three days, scarcely 
more than a pint of kernels of corn, none of which were 
broken but only parched to blackness by the fire, and a 
piece of meat, most frequently raw bacon, some three 
inches long by an inch and a half wide and less than half 
an inch thick. Now no Northern soldier could have lived 
three days upon that, and the lank, emaciated con- 
dition of the prisoners fully testifies to the meagerness of 
their means of subsistence * * * With regard to cloth- 
ing it was simply impossible for the Confederates at that 
time and for many preceding months to have sufficient 
clothing upon the bodies of their soldiers, and many 
passed the wint-er barefoot. 

Of course if there had been no food in the coun- 
try no criticism could be made upon the Confeder- 
ate civil administration for giving the army none. 
But there was plenty of food if energetic action 
had been taken to concentrate it for the army. 

Major Lewis Ginter, who died in 1897, was 
one of the most respected and beloved citizens that 
Richmond ever had. During the war he was the 
quartermaster of Thomas's Georgia brigade. He 
was a very prosperous business man, and after the 
war he made a very large fortune in the cigarette 
business in the firm of Allen & Ginter. This busi- 
ness developed into the great American Tobacco 



SOME REMINISCENCES 43 

Company, Prior to the war Gen. Robert E. Lee 
knew Major Ginter well, and had the greatest con- 
fidence in him and the greatest respect for him. 

In 1895 the same Judge Keith, to whom I have 
already referred, and myself were calling upon 
Major Ginter one evening, and the starving con- 
dition of our army at Petersburg in the winter and 
spring of 1864-65 came under discussion. Major 
Ginter made the following statement, in effect, to 
us. He said that General Lee sent for him during 
that time and told him to go down into North 
Carolina and see if he could not find something 
there to feed and clothe his army with. Ginter 
said he went to Danville, Virginia, and there 
found warehouses bursting with grain and meat. 
On inquiring what this meant, the quartermaster in 
charge said they could not get the use of any trains 
to send these provisions to the army; that the sut- 
lers controlled all the transportation and were 
using it to carry wines and whiskey and cigars and 
other such things to Richmond; that these sutlers 
had the authority of the Confederate administra- 
tion for what they were doing. The quartermas- 
ter said that if General Lee would only say the 
word they would forcibly seize the engines and 
cars and send the provisions to the army. Ginter 
said he went to Charlotte, North Carolina, and to 
other North Carolina towns, and he found the 
same conditions existing in all of them. He re- 



44 SOME REMINISCENCES 

turned to Petersburg and reported what he had 
learned to General Lee, and he urged him to send 
orders to the quartermasters to seize the trains and 
send him provisions. He said General Lee walked 
up and down in his tent for awhile and then said, 
"No, Major, I can't do it. It would be revolu- 
tionary. If the administration chooses to let this 
army starve it will have to starve." 

The thing happened just as Major Ginter told 
it, because he was incapable of telling a falsehood; 
and Judge Keith will testify I have related it just 
as Major Ginter told it to us. 

If the Army of Northern Virginia had been kept 
supplied with food and clothing General Grant 
would have found his work cut out for him when 
he undertook to drive it away from Petersburg. I 
don't believe the army was ever marshalled that 
could have done it. The Army of Northern Vir- 
ginia was not conquered. It was simply forsaken 
by its government and left to perish. 

It may be thought that after these bitter reflec- 
tions I am still an "unreconstructed rebel." But I 
am not. I have come to believe that the thing 
turned out as it ought to have turned out. Slavery 
and the principle of secession had to be got rid of 
and the only way they could ever have been got 
rid of was to fight the war to a finish. 

I am a thoroughly reconstructed rebel that looks 
upon the Government of the United States as his 



SOME REMINISCENCES 45 

government, and I am as ready to offer my life 
for it as I was to offer it for the Confederate Gov- 
ernment. But when I get to writing of those old 
days my fighting blood gets up and all the enthusi- 
asm of the period returns to me. 

I return now to Colonel Palmer's narrative. 

R. E. Lee, April 20, 1863, to Davis, {page 737) : Gives 
points in the South (Florida and Georgia) where 
supplies can be had in abundance. 

R. E. Lee, May 2, 1863, to Davis, {page 407) : In- 
sufficiency of cavalry in his army; points out where 
cavalry regiments doing nothing can be ordered to him. 
Fears disaster trom insufficiency of cavalry. 

R E. Lee, May 2, 1863, to Davis, {page 765): "If I 
had all of my command and could keep it supplied with 
provisions and forage, I would feel easy." 

R E. Lee, May 7, 1863, to Davis, {page 782) : Calls 
attention to insufficiency of his cavalry. His army 
40,000; Hooker's, 120,000 men. Losses at Chancel- 
lorsville heavy; always so where the inequality of num- 
bers is so great. Recommends that troops be brought 
from the South, where they have nothing to do and 
will perish from disease and inaction. Bring Beaure- 
gard with them and put him in command here. 

R. E. Lee, May 20, 1863, to Davis, (page 810) : A. P. 
Hill, I think upon the whole, is the best soldier of his 
grade with me. 
R. E. Lee, May 30, 1863, to Davis, (page 832): Re- 
quests that the War Department take charge of D. H. 
Hill's department of the Cape Fear and that he be 
relieved of its supervision. D. H. Hill does not coop- 
erate with him or obey him or return troops that belong 
to the Army of Northern Virginia. These delays, he 



46 SOME REMINISCENCES 

fears, will leave him nothing to do but to retreat. 
Fears that the time has passed when he can take the 
offensive with advantage. 

R. E. Lee, May 30, 1863, to Seddon, (page 834): Rec- 
ommends that troops be brought from South Carolina, 
Georgia, Florida, Cape Fear Department, and James 
River. Asks to be relieved of command of Cape Fear 
Department. 

R. E. Lee, June 2, 1863, to Davis, (page 849) : Regrets 
to lose Jenkins's and Ransom's brigades; good officers 
and veteran troops. Comments on D. H. Hill's actions. 

R. E. Lee, June 2, 1863, to Seddon, (page 849) : Further 
comments on D. H. Hill's retaining his troops and at- 
tempting to send inferior troops in their stead. 

R. E. Lee, June 3, 1863, to Seddon, (page 851) : About 
D. H. Hill's conduct and the best brigades retained 
from the Army of Northern Virginia. 

Series I, Vol. XXVU, Part III, Serial Number 40 

GETTYSBURG. 

R. E. Lee, June 3, 1863, to Gen. Sam Jones, (page 858) : 
Even with this reduction I am deficient in general trans- 
portation for quartermaster, etc., trains. 

R. E. Lee, June 5, 1863, to Gen. A. P. Hill, (page 859) : 
Third army corps in front of Fredericksburg, balance 
of the army moving north. 

R. E. Lee, June 8, 1863, to Seddon, Secretary of War, 
(page 868): Writing of D. H. Hill. "He does not 
seem to have projected much and has accomplished 
less." Nothing to be gained by remaining on the de- 
fensive. If the Department thinks it better to remain 
on defensive it has only to inform me. Troops not 
needed in the South. Sent to the armies in the field, 
we might hope to make some impression on the enemy. 

Note on the ivay to Gettysburg: Insufficient food, in- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 47 

sufficient transportation, insufficient cavalry. No 
infantry reinforcements. Can't get his own troops from 
Cape Fear Department. Troops rotting from inac- 
tion in South. Heroically starts north, but on June 8th 
at Culpeper Court House. Is uncertain if Department 
will let him go. 

Seddon, Secretary of War, June g, l86j, to Gen. Lee, 
(page 874): Apologizes to General Lee and explains 
that the disposition of the troops in North Carolina is 
determined by Mr. Davis. 

Gen. R. E. Lee, June g, i86j, to Davis, (page 874): 
Culpeper Court House. Reports that the enemy's cav- 
alry, infantry, and artillery have crossed the Rappahan- 
nock in force. Prisoners from two corps captured. 
Suggests orders to Cooke's brigade and Jenkins's bri- 
gade to be sent to the Army of Northern Virginia. 

President Davis, June Q, 1863, (page 874): Mr. Davis 
refers General Lee's dispatch to Gen. D. H. Hill as to 
Jenkins's and Cooke's brigades. 

Saml. Cooper, A. A. G., June 10, 1863, to Gen. D. H. 
Hill, (page 870): Informs Gen. D. H. Hill of Gen- 
eral Lee's order as to Cooke's and Jenkins's brigades 
and leaves it to Gen. D. H. Hill's discretion if General 
Lee's order shall be carried out. 

R. E. Lee, June 13, 1863, to Seddon, (page 886): "You 
can realize the difficulty of operating in an offensive 
movement with this army if it is to be divided to cover 
Richmond. It seems to me useless to attempt it with 
the force against it." 

Saml. Cooper, A. A. G., June 15, 1863, to D. H. Hill, 
{pages Sgo-Sgi) : Authorizes Hill to retain Jenkins's 
brigade. Ransom's to Drewry's Bluff. Corse's Virginia 
brigade drawn from General Lee's command at Cul- 
peper. 

R. E. Lee, June 16, 1863, to A. P. Hill: Informs him 



48 SOME REMINISCENCES 

that Anderson's division of his corps, Third, has reached 
Culpeper Court House. Expects another division next 
day, 

Davis, June ig, 1863, to Lee, (page Q04J : Informs Gen- 

eral Lee why a part of his army, "Pickett's division, 

Q^ ^orse's brigade, has been detained. Jenkins's brigade 

^ —deemed necessary by D. H. Hill to protect Petersburg." 

Gen. A. G. Jenkins, June 20, 1863, to D. H. Hill, Mur- 
fee's Depot, (p. go8). I beg as a personal favor that 
you arrange to send my brigade to join General Lee. I 
have sent scouts to Suffolk. No enemy, no gunboats. 

Gen. G. E. Pickett, June 21, 1863, to A. A. G. Chilton, 
(page 910) : Wants his scattered command sent to 
him. 

Gen. Lee, June 22, 1863, to Gen. J. E. B. Stuart, {page 
913): Move with three brigades into Maryland. 
(Two brigades can guard the Blue Ridge and take care 
of your rear.) Take position on General Ewell's right. 
Place yourself in communication with him. One col- 
umn will move by Emmitsburg route, another by 
Chambersburg. 

Gen. Lee, June 23, 1863, to Gen. Stuart: I think you 
had better withdraw on this side of the mountain to- 
morrow night, camp at Shepherdstown the next day and 
move over to Frederickstown. In either case, after 
crossing the river you must move on and feel the right 
of Ewell's troops, collecting information, provisions, 
etc. 

Gen. Lee, June 23, 1863, to Davis, (page 92^). Urges 
withdrawal of troops from Carolina and Georgia under 
Beauregard and part at least pushed forward to Cul- 
peper Court House. His presence would give magni- 
tude to even a small demonstration and tend greatly to 
confound and perplex the enemy. Good results would 
follow from sending forward under Beauregard such 



SOME REMINISCENCES 49 

troops about Richmond and North Carolina as could be 
spared for a short time. The good effect of beginning 
to assemble an army at Culpeper Court House would, 
I think, soon become apparent, and the movement might 
be increased in importance as the result might appear to 
justify. 

R. E. Lee to Saml. Cooper, A. A. G., June 23, {p. 925) : 
Urges that Corse's brigade be sent to Pickett's division. 
Not needed where it is, especially if the plan of as- 
sembling an army under Beauregard at Culpeper C. H. 
is adopted. 

Gen. Lee to Davis, opposite Williamsport, June 25, 1863, 
(p- 93) '■ "If the place I suggested the other day of or- 
ganizing an army, even in effigy, under Beauregard at 
Culpeper C. H. can be carried into effect, much relief 
will be afforded. If even the brigades in Virginia and 
North Carolina, which Generals D. H. Hill and Elzey 
think cannot be spared, were ordered there at once and 
General Beauregard were sent there, if he had to re- 
turn to South Carolina, it would do more to protect 
both States than anything else." 

Gen. Lee to Davis, Williamsport, June 25, 1863: "It 
seems to me that we cannot afford to keep our troops 
awaiting possible movements of the enemy, but that 
our true policy is, as far as we can, to employ our own 
forces so as to give occupation to his, at points of our 
selection. * * * j f^el sure, therefore, that the 
best use that can be made of the troops in Carolina and 
those in Virginia now guarding Richmond would be the 
prompt assembling of the main body of them * * * 
together with as many as can be drawn from the army 
of Gen. Beauregard at Culpeper C. H. under the com- 
mand of that officer. It should never be forgotten that 
our concentration at any point compels that of the 
enemy, and his numbers being limited, tends to relieve 
all other threatened localities." 
4 



50 SOME REMINISCENCES 

Page g46. — Abstract from the Department of North 
Carolinaj Maj.-Gen. D. H. Hillj commanding, head- 
quarters near Richmond, Virginia, June JO, 1863. 
Permanent force: Clingman's brigade, Cooke's bri- 
gade, Martin's brigade, Colquitt's brigade, Jenkins's bri- 
gade. Ransom's brigade, unattached infantry; artillery; 
cavalry. Officers, 1,308; aggregate present, 22,822; pieces 
of field artillery, 104. 

Major General Elzey's Command: Wise's brigade, 
Corse's brigade of Pickett's division ; local troops, number 
not given. 

Mr. Davis's letter to General Lee of June 28, 1863, 
giving reasons why he could not send General Beaure- 
gard to Culpeper C. H. to make a diversion in his favor 
ivas entrusted to a courier who was captured by Captain 
Dahlgren of General Meade's staff, so that General 
Meade had full knowledge that he had nothing to fear in 
the direction of Washington. General Lee first learned 
that his suggestions would not be entertained by reading 
Mr. Davis's letter to him in the New York Herald and 
the New York Tribune. 

This ends Colonel Palmer's narrative. There 
are several remarks to be made upon it. It Is posi- 
tively sickening to see the contempt with which 
General Lee's recommendations and suggestions 
were treated. He, the Hercules of the undertak- 
ing, without whom all of them would have been 
kicked Into the James River In a jiffy, receives no 
more consideration when he tells them what Is nec- 
essary to do than If he had been a quartermaster's 
clerk In some bomb-proof. He cannot even require 



SOME REMINISCENCES 51 

his subordinate, D. H. Hill, to send him his vet- 
eran brigades which he needed so sadly in the crisis 
at Gettysburg. His recommendations, so full of 
wisdom and common sense, that the large force 
scattered over the south should be concentrated at 
Culpeper Court House to threaten Meade's rear 
when he and Meade came to their death grapple 
is treated as if it were the suggestion of an idle 
school boy. 

"Those whom the gods wish to destroy they 
first make mad," and this seems to have been the 
reason the Confederacy had its civil administra- 
tion. 

No wonder General Lee resigned the command 
of his army when he got back from Gettysburg, 
and no one without his sublime patriotism and he- 
roism would ever have consented to withdraw his 
resignation. 

Gen. Robert E. Lee was, in my opinion, one of 
the greatest, if not the very greatest, characters in 
all history. The domination which he established 
over the Army of Northern Virginia is as high a 
tribute to him as could be paid. There were some 
of the fiercest and most inflexible men in that army 
that the world has ever seen. Stonewall Jackson, 
Jubal A. Early, John B. Gordon, J. E. B. Stuart, 
J. B. Hood were men who would stand erect in any 
presence on earth and yet they all stood uncovered 
in Lee's presence, and took the law from him as a 



52 SOME REMINISCENCES 

child takes It from his father. Stonewall Jackson 
once said that General Lee was the only man in the 
world that he would follow blindly, but that he 
would follow Lee blindly wherever he chose to 
lead. The whole army had exactly that feeling 
toward General Lee. They all called him "Marse 
Robert," and this expressed their feeling of devo- 
tion toward him. None but the most extraordi- 
nary man could have established such a mastery 
over these inflexible men. It was General Lee's 
domination of his army that made it the greatest 
fighting machine the world ever saw. 

In the year 1890 the magnificent equestrian 
statue of General Lee was unveiled at Richmond. 
There was an immense turnout of Confederate sol- 
diers from all over the South. It was a day to be 
remembered by all who saw it. Many members of 
the old Third Virginia Cavalry attended, and they 
formed themselves into an organization. Their 
old colonel, Owens, was there, one of the most gal- 
lant and splendid soldiers who ever drew a sword. 
He was very poor and was unable to secure a horse 
to ride at the head of his regiment. My dear 
friend, Ned Minor, who belonged to the Third, 
told me the state of the case. Another dear friend 
of^ine, Willie Trigg, had lent me his horse, and 
s6[l said to Minor, "What, Colonel Owens with- 
out a horse on such an occasion as this! That shall 
never be while Buck Royall has one." (My 



SOME REMINISCENCES 53 

friends have always called me "Buck.") "Take 
my horse and convey him to Colonel Owens with 
my compliments." He did i^and the dear old 
colonel rode at the head of his regiment on that 
proud day, one of the proudest men there. He 
was unable to make me what he considered a fitting 
acknowledgment of my service to him, but he had 
just had a girl baby born and he went home and 
named her "Buck Royall." 

Speaking of General Robert E. Lee, in my opin- 
ion there was never anything more preposterous 
than the claim of Union zealots that General Lee 
was a traitor because he cast in his lot with the 
Southern people. It is well known that one of 
their heroes, General George ^. Thomas, hesl-. 
tated a long time whether he should not resign 
from the Union Army and come South, and the 
admirers of Admiral Farragut (and who is not an 
admirer of him?) had better not press their in- 
quiries too closely or they may find out the same 
thing about him. 

After our return from Gettysburg and while the 
army was about Culpeper Court House, Colonel 
Chambliss, of the Thirteenth Virginia, command- 
ing our brigade, had me detailed as a scout because 
of my knowledge of the country north of the Rap- 
pahannock, to get information concerning the 
enemy then occupying that territory. I remained 



54 SOME REMINISCENCES 

detailed for that service until March 20, 1864, 
coming under the personal orders and direction of 
General J. E. B. Stuart. 

I had many thrilling adventures in my career as 
a scout. On one occasion I had four men with me, 
and we came to a house about half a mile from a 
camp of three regiments of Federal cavalry in 
lower Culpeper County where a party of eight men 
from this camp were pillaging and plundering a 
poor woman's premises. We waylaid these gen- 
tlemen as they were leaving this house, and spring- 
ing up we demanded their surrender. Six of them 
surrendered, but two of them tried to run the 
gauntlet. One of my men shot one of them dead 
but the other one got away. 

I knew of course this was going to bring an over- 
whelming force down on me and that I had to dust. 
I was mounted on one of the captured horses with 
two of their Sharp's carbines taken from the enemy 
swung around my shoulders. The prisoners were 
walking, and one of my men, named Robert W. 
Monroe, was on foot with them. The other three 
of my men were some distance in the rear with the 
captured horses. In turning a corner in some very 
thick pines we came face to face with two mounted 
Federal soldiers not twenty feet from us. I called 
out at once to them, "Surrender!" Instead of 
doing so the man on my side of the road coiri- 
menced drawing his revolver. I raised one of my 



SOME REMINISCENCES SS 

carbines to my shoulder and with the start I had 
in firing I ought to have shot him dead before he 
got his revolver from the holster. But I retained 
the reins in my left hand, and as soon as I slack- 
ened the pressure on the bit my horse would 
move forward and disturb my aim. This was re- 
peated two or three times, by which time I had 
lost my advantage over my adversary and I could 
see down the barrel of his revolver pointed directly 
at me. I saw I must fire or I was gone, and so I 
pulled the trigger with the best aim I could get. 
I made the luckiest of shots. I struck him at the 
pit of his right arm and cut it almost off. His 
cocked revolver fell from his hand. It was at full 
cock and in another instant he would have fired. 
The other man had his revolver in his boot, and 
in endeavoring to draw it the lock hung in his 
boot strap, and he was tugging away at it while the 
battle was going on between me and his friend. 
Monroe had run to him and seized his horse by 
the bit, but he did not see Monroe, who had to 
strike him a violent blow with his revolver to get 
his attention ; but when that occurred he sung out 
in fine style that he would surrender. He wore a 
pair of long buckskin gloves that he presented to 
me and they had printed across them the words 
Augustus J. Mount of New Jersey. I would not 
tell this but that Monroe is living to say whether 
it Is true or not. A letter addressed to him at Gold- 



56 SOME REMINISCENCES 

vein, Fauquier County, Virginia, will receive im- 
mediate attention. I suspect if Mr. Mount is alive 
he, too, has a rather lively recollection of the inci- 
dent. 

We left the wounded man on the side of the 
road, knowing full well that his friends would soon 
be there. I was told afterward that he died. He 
was as game a chap as I ever encountered. 

I took my prisoners to Richmond and lodged 
them in Libby Prison. At that time General 
Meade's army was lying about Culpeper Court 
House. The territory around Fredericksburg was 
neutral, sometimes occupied by the scouting parties 
of one side, sometimes by the other. About seven 
or eight miles from Fredericksburg there was a 
place called Hamilton's Crossing, to which, as I 
knew, the railroad daily sent a train of long box- 
cars. I took my prisoners to Hamilton's Crossing 
to put them on this train. When I got there I 
found Judge R. C. L. Moncure, the President of 
the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, a po- 
sition that corresponds to chief justice in the other 
States. He is since dead, leaving a saintly name 
as a man and a judge. The old gentleman's home 
was in the lower end of Stafford County, near 
Fredericksburg, though his family was with him in 
Richmond. He had been to his home to kill and 
slaughter a young steer that he had there and carry 
it to Richmond for his family. I knew the old 



SOME REMINISCENCES 57 

gentleman well and we greeted each other most 
cordially. The conductor gave me one of the long 
box-cars to put my prisoners in, and locked the 
Judge and myself in it with the prisoners. It was 
just at nightfall when the train started for Rich- 
mond, and it took us all night to get there. I had 
on me two large army revolvers and I gave the 
old Judge one of these. I put the prisoners at one 
end of the car and the Judge and I sat on the floor 
at the other end. It was pitch dark in the car. I 
notified the prisoners that if I heard any movement 
amongst them I should commence firing on them 
and continue firing while the movement lasted, so 
that there was perfect quiet there during the night. 
The old Judge sat bolt upright all night guarding 
the prisoners, while I laid down and had a good 
night's sleep. We have often laughed together 
since over how I made him sit up all night and 
guard my prisoners while I enjoyed a refreshing 
sleep. 

I want to make it known that I did my duty as a 
Confederate soldier, and so I state the following. 
In 1896 I applied for membership in George E. 
Pickett Camp of Confederate Veterans at Rich- 
mond. The commander told me I must furnish 
references to prove my standing as a soldier. I 
replied that a private soldier should always refer 
to his captain for testimony as to his standing, and 
that my last captain, — two having been killed, — 



58 SOME REMINISCENCES 

E. M. Henry, lived at Norfolk, Virginia. He 
wrote to him and received the following reply, 
which is on file in Pickett Camp in Richmond : 

Norfolk, Virginia, April g, i8g6. 
Col. R. N. Northern, Commander Pickett Camp C. V. 

Dear Colonel : Yours of the 7th Inst, received, and in 
reply would state that it gives me great pleasure to testify 
to the good standing and soldierly qualities of Mr. W. 
L. Royall during the war. He was a member of my 
Company A, Ninth Virginia Cavalry, Beale's brigade. 
He was a brave and gallant trooper, bold and daring, and 
served for the last two years of the war as a scout, de- 
tailed for that purpose, and rendered valuable service in 
gaining information as to the enemy's movements by his 
daring and risk of life. 

Your Comrade, E. M. Henry, 
Capt. Co. A, Ninth Virginia Cavalry. 

I would not exchange that certificate for Mr. 
Rockefeller's fortune. 

On March 20, 1864, I got into a brush with 
some Federal cavalry and was shot through the 
left hand and taken prisoner. The headquarters 
of the command, which was the Second New York 
Cavalry and the Eighteenth Pennsylvania Cavalry, 
under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Tim- 
othy O'Brien, were at "The Grove," in the lower 
end of Fauquier County, Virginia, where these two 
regiments had been for several weeks. 

At "The Grove" there were two churches and 



SOME REMINISCENCES 59 

nothing else; one was a Presbyterian church on the 
north side of the pubHc road, the other, a Baptist 
church, on the south side. My mother's home was 
distant only two miles from "The Grove." My 
father, a Presbyterian minister, had built the 
Presbyterian church at "The Grove," and he 
preached in it for twenty years. He was buried at 
the back of the church. 

The officer in charge of the party that had 
captured me was a lieutenant in the Second New 
York Cavalry. He had frequently ridden over to 
my mother's house and had made the acquaintance 
of the family. They treated him courteously and 
politely, and he had promised my mother that if 
I ever fell into his hands he would see that I was 
properly treated. When we got to "The Grove" 
I was put into the Baptist church. After a while 
I was sent for and taken over to the Presbyterian 
church. When I entered I saw a table around 
which were seated some five or six officers with a 
Bible on the table. I had had sufficient acquaint- 
ance with military matters to know that a drum- 
head court martial in the field is usually nothing 
but a stepping-stone to the gallows, and this looked 
to me prodigiously like a drumhead court martial. 
I was ordered to be seated, and then Colonel 
O'Brien read an order which he seemed to have 
that day received from General Kilpatrick. It was 
about like this; 



6o SOME REMINISCENCES 

Colonel O'Brien: 

The first bushwhacker you catch, you will try by 
court martial and have hung. 

General Kilpatrick. 

Colonel O'Brien told me I was about to be tried 
by court martial on the charge of being a bush- 
whacker. The situation was about as terrible as a 
boy of nineteen could be confronted with. For a 
time I was dazed and could say nothing. But by 
degrees I recovered possession of my faculties, and 
was soon pleading my cause more earnestly than 
I have ever since pleaded one. I had General 
Stuart's orders in my pocket detailing me from my 
regiment and ordering me upon the very service I 
had been engaged in, and I made the most of that. 
Finally I was sent out. In the course of an hour 
Colonel O'Brien came to me and told me the court 
had acquitted me. I doubt if in all my career my 
life has been in as much danger as it was that day. 

After the trial I was put into an ambulance to 
be carried to General Meade's headquarters at 
Brandy Station, Culpeper County. My friend, the 
second lieutenant of the Second New York Cavalry, 
who had been on the court martial, came to the 
ambulance with some loaves of bread for me. I 
asked him how it was I escaped. He told me he 
had promised my mother to look out for me if I 
ever fell in his hands and that he had just taken 
the stand in the court that I should not be hung 



SOME REMINISCENCES 6i 

and had finally brought a majority of the officers 
over to his side. When I got to General Meade's 
headquarters I was put into the "bull pen." This 
was a circular stockade made of split poles set into 
the ground and about fifteen or eighteen feet high, 
with no covering for it but the heavens. It was 
bitterly cold, and the snow fell that night a foot 
deep. When I entered the "bull pen," which was 
filled with Federal deserters, Confederate deserters, 
Confederate prisoners of war and civilian prisoners, 
perhaps fifty in number all told, to my amazement 
I found amongst them my little brother Taylor, 
twelve years of age. Some wretched raiders had 
torn him from my mother's arms and had brought 
him there. My mother was only able to throw an 
old shawl around him, which she had pinned at the 
neck. The poor little fellow was shivering with 
cold when I found him. There was a small open 
fire in the middle of the pen that every one was 
struggling to get near. I struggled with the rest, 
to get Taylor to the fire, but with my wounded 
hand I was not in good shape for the struggle. 
That night we had to lie upon the ground to get 
what sleep we did get. I had a heavy army over- 
coat and I took the child in my arms, wrapping 
his shawl and my overcoat around us as best I 
could, and there we lay through all that dreadful 
night. 

Next day I was taken out of the "bull pen" and 



62 SOME REMINISCENCES 

sent to the Old Capitol Prison in Washington. I 
never saw Taylor again. The exposure was too 
much for him. His throat was weak and had been 
operated on. In a short time he was taken out of 
the "bull pen" and sent to Alexandria, and there, 
in the common jail, he died, without a face near 
him that he had ever looked on before. 

I was kept in the Old Capitol Prison until about 
the middle of June, when I was sent around by 
sea to Fort Delaware, which is situated upon a 
small island about forty miles from Philadelphia, 
where the Delaware River debouches into the 
Delaware Bay. The river is about four miles wide 
at this point and the island is in about the middle 
of the river. There were some eight thousand 
Confederate prisoners on this island during the 
year I stayed there. They were kept in barracks 
made by planking up frames of scantling. These 
barracks were very open, and there was only one 
stove to a barrack containing 400 men, called a 
division. The stove was practically useless for 
heating the barrack, and the weather was intensely 
cold there in the winter. I have seen the Delaware 
River frozen over so fast and tight that an army 
with all its artillery and trains could pass over on 
the ice. 

When I had been there a short time, Hon. 
Theodore F. Randolph, afterward Governor of 
New Jersey and United States Senator from New 



SOME REMINISCENCES 6^ 

Jersey, who had married a relative of mine, found 
out I was at Fort Delaware and from that time on, 
until I was released from prison in June, 1865, he 
supplied me with $25 every six weeks. Two mem- 
bers of my company were in prison with me and I 
shared this money with them. It was most ma- 
terial in keeping us alive. 

The treatment we received at Fort Delaware is 
an everlasting disgrace to the Government of the 
United States of that period. Much has been said 
of the bad treatment of Union soldiers held 
prisoners by the Confederacy but it is well known 
that the Confederates were anxious to exchange 
prisoners and that the Union prisoners fared as 
well as the Confederate soldiers In the field. The 
Confederates did as well as they could do, but 
there was no excuse for the Union Government 
not giving us all the food and warmth that was 
necessary for they had an abundance of everything. 
We were starved and frozen; we had but two 
meals a day. Breakfast consisted of a piece of 
loaf bread about the size of a man's clenched fist 
and a little piece of salt pork or beef about an 
inch thick. We had no coffee. Dinner consisted 
of the same. This was not food enough to keep a 
man from being perpetually hungry and no one 
can imagine the pangs of perpetual hunger who 
has not endured them. 

A piece of wanton cruelty was inflicted upon us 



64 SOME REMINISCENCES 

in the matter of blankets. No prisoner was al- 
lowed to have more than one blanket, never mind 
how he might have come in possession of the excess. 
Once in every two weeks the whole prison was 
turned out and each man was searched and all blan- 
kets in excess of one to the man were confiscated. 
I used to buy blankets in between these searches, 
for myself and my two comrades, but they were in- 
variably taken away from us and we had to sleep 
in that awful cold on bare planks with little or no 
covering. Our sufferings were intense. 



CHAPTER II 

EVENTS IN RICHMOND DUELLING 

In June, 1865, I returned to my mother's home 
to find the family, consisting of my mother, my 
grandmother, my aunt, my elder, but incapacitated 
brother, my sister and her husband and four chil- 
dren and my unmarried sister, existing, but that 
was all, on the place. The negroes were all gone, 
the Federal army had taken from them every ani- 
mal and how they had managed to exist I could 
not understand. I went to work as a common 
laborer on the farm and labored there two years, 
by which time I had pulled the place up so that 
my mother and her family could get a very good 
living out of it. 

My mother had some money at interest before 
the war, and getting that in, she gave me $2,000 
and started me out in the world to make my future, 
whether good or bad. 

I came to Richmond, January i, 1868, and 
read law with William Green, Esq., the most pro- 
found and learned lawyer that I have ever known 
anything of. His argument in the case of Moon 
vs. Stone in 19th Grattan has been referred to by 
the judges in Westminster Hall.* 

* Mr. Green was not only a most learned lawyer, but he had 
picked up a vast deal of miscellaneous information from books, 
5 



66 SOME REMINISCENCES 

At the end of a year's study I was licensed to 
practice law, and I hung out my shingle in the city 
of Richmond. The society of Richmond was at 
that time most delightful as it is to this day. The 
young ladles were many of them very beautiful and 
of the most fascinating manners. They had just 

and when once he learned a thing in reading it stuck in his mind 
like a burr. Like all very learned men he always had a "wise 
saw and modern instance" for every case, and the thing that 
interested him whenever any subject came up for discussion was 
the appropriateness of the citation he was going to make for that 
case. 

For two or three years after the close of the war Chief Jus- 
tice Salmon P. Chase came to Richmond regularly to hold the 
United States Circuit Court. On one of these occasions Mr. 
James Lyons, an eminent member of the Richmond bar, gave 
Judge Chase a dinner to which Mr. Green was invited. During 
dinner Judge Chase told an anecdote about Mr. Lincoln. He 
said that soon after the Monitor and the Merrimac had their 
bout in Hampton Roads, the Secretary of the Navy invited Mr. 
Lincoln, himself, and two or three other members of the Cabinet 
to take a little jaunt on a government steamer down the Po- 
tomac. Between Washington and Alexandria they came to a 
place where a cordon of logs and other obstructions extended 
from either shore to the channel, leaving just enough space for 
a good sized steamer to pass through. Mr. Lincoln asked the 
Secretary of the Navy what that was meant for. "Oh," replied 
he, "that has been constructed here to stop the Merrimac in case 
she should get up here." "Well," said Mr. Lincoln, "that re- 
minds me of an anecdote. Once I was riding through my dis- 
trict in Illinois accompanied by a friend or two, and we came 
to a stream where several naked men were bathing. I said to 
one of my friends, 'I wonder why men were given udders.' 'Oh,' 
said he, 'it was to suckle babies in case they had any.' " Well, 
every one was on the go to laugh at the great man's joke and 
the laugh had got well under way, when Mr. Green cut 
in with, "Well, Mr. Chief Justice, Dr. Haxall there will tell 
you that there have been known cases where men have suckled 
infants." 



SOME REMINISCENCES 67 

emerged from the war, during which they had been 
constantly thrown with the most gallant and attrac- 
tiv^e men in the Confederate Army, and they had 
thus acquired an aplomb and a savoir faire ex- 
celling by far that of any set of young women that 
\ have ever been thrown with. Amongst the men 
were to be found the choice spirits of the Confeder- 
ate Army. There were youngsters who had won 
the stars of a colonel on the battlefield, when 
under twenty-one. All of the young men had 
served throughout the war in the ranks or with 
commissions, and this made a camaraderie amongst 
them that never existed anywhere else on the earth. 

Into this delightful society I had free access, 
and that access left upon me a deep scar which I 
bore for a long time, 

I was an awkward, gawky youth, some twenty- 
three years of age when I arrived in Richmond. 
My clothes were of the cut of the countryman and 
my ways and manners very much the same. There 
dwelt then in Richmond a young girl of nineteen, 
who was more beautiful and fascinating than Cleo- 
patra was ever thought to be by either Caesar or 
Mark Antony. Her initials were M. R. Her 
eyes were of the deepest blue, her voice was softer 
and more tender than any strain in Tannhauser's 
Song to the Evening Star, and she had a soft poise 
and balance that captivated any man who fell 
under her influence the moment he heard her speak 



68 SOME REMINISCENCES 

a word. After arriving in Richmond I soon made 
the acquaintance of this fairy, and of course at 
once fell madly in love with her. Everybody knew 
how madly I was in love with her and everybody 
said, "Vv'^hat a fool that green young man Royall 
is to dare aspire to the hand of Miss M. R." She 
was courted by all the best men in the land. But 
that did not restrain me. All my life I have dared 
to aspire to whatever I want, and obstacles have 
only quickened my desires. I went on loving this 
fascinating creature and working out schemes deep 
down in my inner self for winning her. I soon 
declared my love to her, and was of course told 
that she could not think of me. Did that moder- 
ate my ardor? Well, I should think not. It simply 
increased it. I made that girl's life a burden to 
her. I asked myself always, "Why am I not as 
worthy of her as any other? No man can love 
her as I do. I shall win her." I persisted day in 
day out, month in month out, year in year out, 
and after a while I saw I was gaining a foothold. 
We had quarrel after quarrel, and for days 
and sometimes weeks yft would not speak. But 
I saw she was yielding, and when I was alone I 
was ready to dash my head against the wall in 
recognition of the thought. In the end she yielded 
and admitted that she cared for me. No man can 
imagine what ecstasy I enjoyed while we were en- 
gaged. But clouds arose upon our horizon and 



SOME REMINISCENCES 69 

I can never forget that day we parted. I was 
a wounded man from the hour the separation oc- 
curred. 

She was at a Virginia mountain resort that sum- 
mer, and I, like a fool, went there. She was chap- 
eroned by her friend, Mrs. T. D. A talented and 
charming old widow named Mrs. R. S. sat at their 
table with them. One night my friend E. F. told 
me Mrs. R. S. was going to seat a gentleman 
named R. J., who had arrived that day, at their 
table, and that Mrs. T. D. objected very much to 
his being placed there. I knew all about R. J. 
He was a little dissipated, but he was a gentleman 
and had served through the war with great gal- 
lantry as a Confederate soldier. I knew that what 
was in my mind would probably cause him to chal- 
lenge me to a deadly duel, but that did not amount 
to a moment's consideration with me. The only 
thing that counted with me was the fact that Mrs. 
T. D. objected to his being at h^r table and that 
no doubt Miss M. R. shared in the objection. My 
life was of no moment where Miss M. R.'s wishes 
were involved. I at once said to E. P., "Mrs. T. 
D. is my relative, and if she does not want that 
gentleman at her table, he shall not be put there." 
I then went up on the long porch where I knew 
Mrs. R. S. was in conversation with R. J. I called 
her to one side and asked her if it was true she pro- 
posed to put R. J. at Mrs. T. D.'s table. She 



70 SOME REMINISCENCES 

said it was. "Then," said I, "you must not do it." 
In great surprise she asked why. I replied, "Be- 
cause I do not wish it and will not allow it," She 
said she would put him there anyway. I replied 
that if she did it would become my disagreeable 
duty to tal<:e himi away. She did not put him at 
the table, and I did not have the duel that I ex- 
pected to result. I merely mention this incident, 
very disreputable to me, I admit, to show how 
deeply and desperately I loved that girl. As I 
have said, we separated, and she married a man 
who lived in New York. Though I had not 
spoken to her in two years, she wrote me a sweet 
note inviting me to her wedding. I did not go, 
but I went that night to a faro bank, where I lost 
all the money I had about me and also a handsome 
overcoat that had cost me $75, a sum to be taken 
notice of by us young rebels. I was heart-broken 
and became dissipated and lost ten of the most 
valuable years of my life. But in time I became 
my former self and married my present wife. Miss 
Judith Page Aylett, a great-granddaughter of 
Patrick Henry, who has made ample compensation 
to me for all that I lost. 

One incident of the year 1873 in which I played 
a leading part made a great noise at the time. 
Miss Mary Triplett, one of the most beautiful 
women ever created by the Almighty, was at that 



SOME REMINISCENCES 71 

time a reigning belle in Richmond. Page Mc- 
Carty, an attractive, devil-may-care sort of fellow, 
who then lived there, fell desperately in love with 
her, and it was generally understood that they had 
become engaged to be married. All at once Miss 
Mary broke off with him and went to Europe, 
where she stayed possibly a year. When she re- 
turned she would not speak to McCarty and would 
never afterward have anything to do with him. 
We had a german club that met once in two weeks. 
The club was usually led by a reckless, bright, 
audacious fellow named Sprigg Campbell. At one 
of their meetings Campbell contrived a figure that 
would throw McCarty and Miss Triplett together 
for a dance. It was a wanton act intended 
for cleverness. They met, commenced to dance, 
but after a turn or two. Miss Triplett disengaged 
herself and walked to her seat. Every one knew 
that she intended it as a slur on McCarty. It 
threw him into a desperate rage. He spoke of it 
to me after the german, and I have never seen a 
man more wrought up than he was. 

Amongst the young men of Richmond at that 
time was one named John B. Mordecai. He was 
six feet two, about thirty-three years of age, and 
one of the handsomest men I have ever seen. He 
had served gallantly through the war as a private 
soldier in the Richmond Howitzers, was a fellow 
of the most delightful wit, and take him all in all. 



72 SOME REMINISCENCES 

I think he was about the most charming companion 
I have ever known. Handsome, gallant, chival- 
rous, affectionate, and witty, I have never seen his 
like. He, too, was desperately in love with Miss 
Triplett. 

The night of the german and after It was over 
McCarty went to the Enquirer newspaper and 
offered them the following verses which the paper 
published next morning : 

"When Mary's queenly form I press 

In Strauss' latest waltz, 
I would as well her lips caress 

Although those lips be false. 

"For still with fire love tips his dart, 

And kindles up anew 
The flames which once consumed my heart 

When those dear lips were true. 

"Of form so fair, of faith so faint, 

If truth were only in her; 
Though she'd be then the sweetest saint, 

I'd still feel like a sinner." 

I was a bachelor then and took my meals usually 
at Gerots' restaurant. The next morning after 
the german, I was in Gerots' getting my breakfast, 
and had just read these verses in the Enquirer when 
John Mordecai came in. He took up the paper 
and his eyes fell on the verses. He understood 
the whole situation at once, and I saw his face get 



SOME REMINISCENCES 73 

as black as midnight. Laying down the paper he 
said, perceiving that I understood the case, "I shall 
kill that fellow." 

I remonstrated with him, telling him it was a 
matter that he had no right to interfere with; that 
Miss Triplett had a grown brother who would do 
whatever was proper to be done in such a case, 
and that he did not know whether she or her family 
wanted anything done. He would not be quieted, 
however, but went off to our mutual and very dear 
friend, Willie Trigg, to consult with him. Trigg 
told him exactly what I had told him, and between 
us we got him to promise to let McCarty alone. 

That night I met him at the Richmond Club, 
and being seated together on a sofa he proceeded 
to denounce McCarty in the most unmeasured 
terms. A relative of McCarty overheard him and 
reported the denunciation to McCarty. At that 
time duelling was dying in Virginia, but it was very 
far from dead. McCarty sent a friend to Morde- 
cai demanding a retraction and apology, which 
Mordecai refused to make. I knew that McCarty 
said he had not written the verses about Miss Trip- 
lett, but about another lady named Mary, and I 
intervened as a friend, and got the matter patched 
up upon the basis of the verses having been written 
about another person. Thereupon the matter was 
supposed to be closed. 

But there were gossips in Richmond, and one. 



/ 



74 SOME REMINISCENCES 



a singularly beautiful and Intelligent girl, made her 
tongue busy with insinuations that McCarty had 
backed out because he was afraid. These things 
came to McCarty's ear and put him in a terrible 
fury. 

A short time afterward Mordecai entered the 
barroom of the Richmond Club where McCarty 
and Charley Hatcher were. Mordecai ordered a 
drink, and while it was being prepared McCarty 
walked up and down the floor right by Mordecai, 
making reference to the affair and making threats 
of what he would do the next time he got a chance. 
Presently Mordecai walked up to him and said, 
"Do you mean those remarks for me?" McCarty 
replied in the most insulting manner, "And who 
are you, sir?" Mordecai answered, "I am a gentle- 
man, at least." McCarty said as offensively as 
possible, "Ahl" and Mordecai Instantly struck him 
a powerful blow In the face which cut all the skin 
from over his left eye and felled him to the floor. 
Mordecai then jumped on him, seizing both his 
wrists, and had him pinned to the floor, when I, 
hearing the noise, rushed In and separated them. 

McCarty at once sent Mordecai a peremptory 
challenge by Col. Wm. B. Tabb, and it was agreed 
that the duel should come oft" at once near Oak- 
wood, McCarty to be represented by Colonel Tabb 
and John S. Meredith; Mordecai, by myself and 
Willie Trigg. The terms were that they were to 



SOME REMINISCENCES 75 

fire at ten paces. The command would be, "Fire — 
one, two, three." They could fire at any time 
after the word "fire," but not after the word 
"three." The weapons to be used were Colt's 
army revolvers, all six chambers loaded. 

We placed the men, the word was given, both 
men fired, and both missed. Tabb said to Mc- 
Carty, "Are you satisfied?" McCarty replied, 
"Oh, no. I demand another fire." I have quoted 
everything exactly. Again the word was given, 
both men fired and both fell. McCarty was 
badly wounded by a shot in the hip, Mordecai had 
been struck near the navel, the ball penetrating 
the intestines. He died on the fourth day after the 
duel. McCarty lingered a long time but finally 
recovered, and in a trial was fined $500 and sent 
to jail for six months. The Governor remitted the 
jail sentence on the doctor's certificate that it 
would endanger his life. 

This was the famous duel between Mordecai 
and McCarty. There were several duels after this, 
but none of them fatal, and the duel in Virginia 
is now as dead as Chatham's ghost. I think 
Mordecai was one of the knightliest gentlemen that 
ever lived on this earth. He was shot on Friday, 
but did not die until Tuesday. Monday night 
peritonitis set in and all of Tuesday it was known 
he must die and he knew it too. They urged that 
he should send for a minister of the Gospel, but he 



76 SOME REMINISCENCES 

replied, "No, I shall die as I have lived," and he 
never uttered a whimper. An hour before his end- 
ing he sent for me. Putting his arms around my 
neck he pulled my ear down to his mouth and 
whispered, "Remember, Royall, what I told you." 
I answered, "I certainly shall, John." It was a 
message to his sweetheart. 

As I was much mixed up in duels while they 
lasted, although bitterly opposed to them on prin- 
ciple and detesting the very mention of them, I 
shall detail here all that I propose to say of them. 

In 1 86 1 Bradley T. Johnson was a handsome, 
stylish-looking lawyer of about thirty-three. He 
lived at Frederick, Maryland, where he had at 
that time acquired much reputation as a lawyer 
and public man. He was an ardent secessionist 
on principle and believed that the time had come 
for the South to secede from the Union. When 
the Confederate Government was established at 
Richmond, he went there as captain of a company 
of infantry which he brought from Frederick. In 
a short time the Maryland companies were all con- 
solidated into the First Maryland Infantry, and 
Johnson became its colonel. 

There was no more daring and gallant soldier 
in the Confederate Army than Johnson. His 
regiment was with Stonewall Jackson in that re- 
nowned campaign of his in the Valley of Virginia 
in 1862, and it contributed most materially to win- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 77 

ning Jackson's prodigious reputation. Jackson, 
who knew a soldier the moment he laid eyes on 
him, was continually writing Jeff Davis and the 
Secretary of War, urging that Johnson should be 
promoted to brigadier-general, but Mr. Davis, 
hide-bound to one of his pet theories, always 
answered there was no Maryland brigade for him, 
as if we were not to have the services of the most 
useful man in the army if there was no command 
from his State. 

When the second battle of Manassas was 
fought in the fall of 1862 the enlistment of the 
Maryland regiment had expired. They were 
disbanded, and Johnson was without a commission 
and without a command. He was riding at that 
time with Stonewall Jackson as a sort of volunteer 
aide. One of Jackson's Virginia brigades was 
without a brigadier and Jackson told Johnson he 
must take command of it. Johnson told Jackson 
he had no commission. Jackson replied that made 
no difference; that he was well known in the army 
as a colonel and wore the uniform of a colonel, and 
that if he went to brigade headquarters with his, 
Jackson's, order to take command of it, everybody 
would submit to his orders, and so the case proved 
to be. Though without a commission, Johnson 
made one of the greatest fights at the railroad cut 
with that Virginia brigade that was ever made in 
war. 



78 SOME REMINISCENCES 

At one time, after he had repulsed one of the 
several attacks and his ammunition was almost ex- 
hausted, he detailed all of the orderly sergeants to 
go out on the field and get all the cartridges on the 
dead Federals. While the orderly sergeants were 
all in a group dividing this ammunition a shell 
burst amongst them and prostrated the whole 
crowd. This of course produced a very demoraliz- 
ing effect on the brigade, which was under a heavy 
artillery fire, and Johnson, calling the men to atten- 
tion, put the brigade through the manual of arms 
as though it had been at a holiday picnic* 

Johnson came back into the service, and finally 
his splendid services compelled the administration 
to make him a brigadier-general, with which rank 
he served to the end. He settled at Richmond 
when peace came to practice law, and he had very 
great success from the beginning. By 1873 he 

*Johnson told me the following incident of the first battle of 
Manassas. He was then major of the First Maryland Infantry. 
His regiment was part of the force which Joseph E. Johnston 
brought from the Valley in time to take part in the battle. Col. 
Arnold Elzey commanded a regiment that day in Gen. E. Kirby 
Smith's brigade, and he was senior colonel and would be briga- 
dier-general if an3'thing happened to Smith. He was very ambi- 
tious, and was heard to mutter when buckling on his sword that 
morning, "Six feet of ground or a yellow sash to-day." 

Johnson's regiment was double-quicked from the depot to the 
battlefield, and when Johnson got there his tongue was hanging 
out. He went up to Elzey, who was also from Maryland, and 
asked him if he could not in some way get him a horse. Just 
then the enemy fired a volley and Smith fell off of his horse 
badlv wounded. "There," said Elzey, "God is just. Go and 
get Smith's horse." 



SOME REMINISCENCES 79 

was a man of very Independent means, and in that 
year he offered me a partnership, which I very 
gladly accepted. We were as intimate friends up 
to the day of his death as ever lived. No two 
brothers could have been closer, and I loved him 
tenderly and sincerely. 

William Mahone was born in Virginia in one 
of the counties south of the James River, between 
Petersburg and Norfolk. He received a military 
education at the Virginia Military Institute, and 
this enabled him to get the command of a Virginia 
regiment of infantry at the beginning of the civil 
war. He was very soon given a brigade of five 
Virginia regiments, so that it may be said that he 
commenced the war as a brigadier-general. His 
brigade was one of the finest in the Confederate 
Army, and it did some of the most heroic fighting 
that was seen during the war. Mahone was a 
splendid organizer and looked after his men with 
the most careful attention, so that the brigade was 
always in first-class condition. The senior colonel 
in the brigade was D. H. Weisiger, who became 
brigadier-general commanding the brigade when 
Mahone was made major-general, Weisiger com- 
manded the brigade In almost every engagement it 
was in. He has frequently told me that he never 
saw Mahone under fire and that he never com- 
manded the brigade In a single action. 



8o SOME REMINISCENCES 

In July, 1864, General Grant blew up a part 
of General Lee's lines in front of Petersburg with 
a mine that he exploded. Lee had known of this 
mine for some time, and had concentrated an artil- 
lery fire on the point that made it simply impossible 
for any troops to come through the gap made in 
the lines until he was able to reinforce the point. 
Two brigades of Mahone's division, the Virginia 
brigade and the Georgia brigade, were brought up 
by a covered way to retake the position then occu- 
pied by a large force of Union troops. Mahone's 
brigade, under Weisiger, marched out of the cov- 
ered way, leaving Mahone in it, formed in line 
some hundred yards from the point of attack, and 
charged the enemy occupying our lines. It was a 
heroic act and was perfectly successful. Just as 
poor old Weisiger had got possession of our lines 
and of everything in them, he was shot through the 
body. He was carried back to the covered way 
to where Mahone was. Weisiger gave me this 
account of what occurred. Mahone said, "Weisi- 
ger, why in the hell are you and old Joe Johnston 
always getting yourselves shot?" Weisiger said 
he thought it was all over with him, and he was 
therefore a little indifferent about insubordination, 
and so he answered, "General Mahone, if you 
would go where General Johnston and I go, you 
would get shot sometimes, too." 

Possibly I am not doing Mahone justice In this 



SOME REMINISCENCES 8i 

sketch of him, because I hated him and he is the 
only man I ever hated. For a number of years 
he was engaged in a deliberate attempt to dishonor 
my native State by forcing a repudiation of her 
public debt, and in the contest which grew out of 
that attempt I came to hate him. My feeling 
toward him may be judged of by the following in- 
cident. 

In some way or another, all at once, a marble 
bust of Mahone appeared in the State Public Li- 
brary amongst her dignitaries and honored sons. 
Everybody resented it, and I made a diligent effort 
to find out by what authority it was put there ; but 
always found that whenever I got to the critical 
point and was just about to find out something 
that would count, all sources of information sud- 
denly closed up and I could get absolutely nothing. 
In one of the suits about our public debt which I 
carried to the Supreme Court of the United States 
(a full account of this whole matter will be given 
later on), the Supreme Court reversed the judg- 
ment of the Hustings Court of the city of Rich- 
mond and gave me costs against the State, amount- 
ing to something like $i 20. I applied to the Hus- 
tings Court of the city of Richmond for an execu- 
tion against the State and it was given to me, and 
I instructed the officers to go into the Public Li- 
brary and le\^ the execution on Mahone's bust and 
nothing else. I intended to buy it at the sale, and 



82 SOME REMINISCENCES 

then publicly smash it into small fragments on 
the public square. The officer went into the 
Capitol building to do as I had directed, but Fitz- 
hugh Lee, who was then Governor, hearing of 
the affair, had the officer forcibly ejected from the 
building, and he refused to make any other levy 
and so I failed to get Mahone's bust and lost my 
costs also. We will go on now with Mahone. 

He was as vain, conceited, and egotistical a 
little chap as ever had anything to do with Vir- 
ginia's affairs. At the end of the war he had a 
very considerable military reputation, but some sol- 
diers said it was a reputation made for him by 
the newspapers. It has always been persistently 
claimed that he kept a newspaper correspondent 
hanging about his headquarters to write him up 
upon all occasions. However that may be, the 
following are undoubted and, in the main, recorded 
facts. 

In June, 1870, there appeared in the Historical 
Magazine, of New York, a monthly of great in- 
fluence and importance, an article entitled, "A Mil- 
itary Memoir of William Mahone, Major-General 
in the Confederate Army," by Gen. J. Watts De 
Peyster. The article stated that it had been sub- 
mitted to General Mahone before publication, and 
that it was approved of by him. The article was, 
perhaps, one of the most fulsome that was ever ap- 
proved by any man. It said that Mahone was a 



SOME REMINISCENCES 83 

better soldier than Eongstreet, and the equal, and 
in some respects the superior, of Stonewall Jackson. 
All this would have passed with nothing but the 
contempt of judicious men if it had been all. But 
it was not all. The article went on to disparage 
some other soldiers, and Gen. Jubal A. Early 
amongst them. I knew General Early very inti- 
mately, and if Mahone had asked my opinion be- 
fore he published his article I should have told 
him to be careful about what he said of him. 
General Early was a rugged character, but one of 
the loftiest, sincerest, and most loyal men that ever 
lived, and the last man in the world to submit to 
an injustice. Accordingly, when he learned of this 
article he wrote Mahone a note calling his atten- 
tion to the unjust references to himself, and Ma- 
hone, being then in the pride and plenitude of a 
power that I will explain further on, treated 
Early's note in the most cavalier manner, and made 
no answer at all. Thereupon General Early 
wrote him a twenty-page letter reviewing his whole 
career in the war and out of the war. It was such 
a letter as no one man ever received and submitted 
to in the history of the world. In those days of 
duelling it meant a fight. 

Well, Mahone had no stomach for a fight, and 
so he got a number of the most prominent people 
in the State to intervene. Gen. Bradley T. Johnson 
amongst them, and the matter was adjusted upon 



84 SOME REMINISCENCES 

the basis that Mahone should have the article re- 
published in the Historical Magazine with all the 
offensive references to General Early omitted, and 
this was done. It was the general understanding 
at the time that the republication cost Mahone 
$10,000. 

When the war ended, Mahone, by reason of 
his newspaper military reputation and the wide 
acquaintance with men that his high position had 
made for him, had a large following, and he was 
ambitious and eager to use such position as he had 
made for himself for all that could be made out 
of it. There was a railroad that had been built 
before the war from Norfolk to Petersburg, called 
the Norfolk and Petersburg Railroad. There 
was another called The Southside Railroad that 
ran from Petersburg to Lynchburg, and another. 
The Virginia and Tennessee, that ran from Lynch- 
burg, Virginia, to Bristol, Tennessee. Now these 
roads made a continuous line of more than four 
hundred miles. The State of Virginia owed a 
large public debt, and the money that she owed 
had been borrowed to contribute to the building of 
the various railroads in the State. In this way she 
owned the controlling voice in the three railroads 
named. Directly after the war Mahone set him- 
self to work to control the Legislature of the State. 
He got control of it and induced it to consolidate 
the three roads named into one road, The Atlan- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 85 

tic, Mississippi and Ohio. The State voted him 
president of the new road with a salary of $25,000 
a year. Thereupon Mahone became a very great 
power in the State and aspired to its absokite con- 
trol. 

Along in 1874-75, Gen. Bradley T. Johnson 
having acquired a competence in the practice of 
law, desired to go into public life, and he com- 
menced by going into the council of the city of 
Richmond. Mahone knew instinctively that John- 
son in public life meant danger to him, Mahone. 
When the election for the City Council was to come 
off, Mahone, who lived in Petersburg, came over 
to Richmond and installed himself in the Rich- 
mond Whig building (the Whig newspaper being 
generally understood to be owned by him), and 
Johnson believed that he had done it with the in- 
tention of interfering with his election. Accord- 
ingly, Johnson scattered a circular all over the city 
informing the people of the facts as he believed 
them to be, and urging the people to turn out and 
vote down this interference with their affairs. 
Mahone, thereupon, enclosed one of these circulars 
to Johnson and asked him if he was its author. 
Johnson replied that he was. Mahone answered, 
denouncing it as a malicious falsehood, and, of 
course, in those days that meant a duel. 

Johnson and I conferred over the matter, and 
Johnson said he would challenge Mahone to a duel. 



86 SOME REMINISCENCES 

He said Col. R. Snowden Andrews was the most 
distinguished Maryland soldier then alive, and 
that he wanted him to act as his second. But An- 
drews was away from Richmond and he feared 
Mahone might make some publication of the affair 
before he could get him here. It was therefore 
agreed between us that I should take a note to Ma- 
hone Informing him that Andrews was telegraphed 
for and that as soon as he arrived a hostile note 
would be sent him. I took this note to the Whig 
building and delivered it to Mahone, and this was 
the one solitary interview that I ever had with him, 
though our lives touched at many points from that 
time on to the time of his death. The Virginia 
Constitution disqualified any one to hold office who 
took part In a duel. As Johnson was going into 
politics he did not want to send a challenge and 
thus disqualify himself If there was to be no duel, 
so Andrews arranged with Mahone that all parties 
would meet at Weldon, North Carolina, at a given 
time, and that he would there give the final chal- 
lenge when nothing could Interrupt the duel. 
Johnson went to Baltimore, went down the bay to 
Norfolk, took the train to Weldon, and was at the 
appointed spot at the appointed hour. Mahone 
went to Norfolk and was there arrested on the 
charge of being about to engage In a duel, and 
was bound over to keep the peace. 

He had got that chivalrous gentleman, Cap- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 87 

tain James Barron Hope, to act as his second, and 
Captain Hope came to Weldon and reported Ma- 
hone's arrest and gallantly offered to take his 
principal's place in the duel. Colonel Andrews 
promptly declined the offer upon the ground that 
General Johnson had no sort of quarrel with Cap- 
tain Hope, but on the contrary had the highest 
respect for and regard for him, and could not 
think of engaging in anything hostile to Captain 
Hope. 

The next duel or "fiasco" that I was connected 
with was between General Kemper and General 
Mahone. Kemper was the commander of one of 
those Virginia brigades that made that immortal 
charge of Pickett's division at Gettysburg and he 
had been left for dead upon the battlefield. He 
recovered from his wound and had been since 
Governor of Virginia. 

One day I met that sturdy old warrior, Gen. 
Eppa Hunton, who commanded the Eighth Vir- 
ginia in Pickett's charge at Gettysburg, and he told 
me General Kemper wanted to see me at the Ex- 
change Hotel. I went to see Kemper, and found 
him with a note from Mahone asking him if he 
had been correctly reported in a reference to him in 
the Dispatch newspaper, and he asked me to repre- 
sent him in the affair. The reference was this. 
We were then in the midst of the political cam- 
paign in which Mahone led a party that proposed 



88 SOME REMINISCENCES 

to repudiate a great part of the State debt. I was 
making speeches over the State for the support of 
the pubHc credit, and Kemper was doing the 
same. At a pubhc meeting at Prince George Court 
House, a short time before, Kemper had said, 
"What would you do, people of Prince George, if 
a man should come to you urging you to do with 
your private debts what William Mahone is urg- 
ing you to do with your public debt? You would 
drive him out of your county to the tune of the 
rogue's march." 

Well, there was a good deal of correspondence 
conducted for General Kemper by Gen. Jubal 
Early and myself which finally resulted in Kemper 
saying in effect he said that and he said nothing 
else, and Mahone saying in effect if that was all 
Kemper said he was satisfied. 

The next duel I was connected with was between 
Col. Thomas Smith of Warrenton, Virginia, and 
W. C. Elam, editor of the Whig, the organ of the 
Readjuster or Repudiator party, and there was 
nothing sham about that duel, I promise you. 
Colonel Smith was the gallant and fearless colonel 
of the Thirty-sixth Virginia Regiment of infantry 
during the war. His honorable father had been 
a member of Congress from Virginia before the 
war, and had also been Governor of the State be- 
fore the war. At the age of sixty-four he had 
taken the field at the beginning of the war as 



SOME REMINISCENCES 89 

colonel of the Forty-ninth Vu-ginia Infantry, and 
had gone up by successive promotions won by 
wounds upon the battlefield to the rank of major- 
general. In 1864 the people of Virginia took him 
from the field and made him their Governor again. 

One evening I got a telegram from Colonel 
Smith asking me to come to Washington City. I 
went, and found him accompanied by Gen. Wm. 
H. Payne, Capt. A. D. Payne, and Bernard P. 
Green. They showed me an editorial article in 
the Richmond Whig, which contained a scandal- 
ous, offensive and false reference to Colonel Smith's 
father, and Smith declared his Intention of holding 
Its author to a personal account. I was a bachelor 
then, and lived In a small house all to myself, with 
my body servant, the most reliable colored man I 
ever knew. He was a prince In his race. So I 
said, "Come along, gentlemen. I'll stow you 
away In my house and we'll fix matters up, and 
have the affair to come off secundum artem." So 
they all came to my house, and I stowed them 
away under cover of night. 

Green made the arrangements for the duel, 
which was to take place at sunrise near Oakwood. 
I knew the firm of Tignor & Co., gunsmiths, had a 
pair of duelling pistols that had been used In a 
duel between Colonel Cameron, afterward Gover- 
nor of the State, and Robert W. Hughes, after- 
ward United States District Judge of Virginia, In 



90 SOME REMINISCENCES 

which Cameron had been badly wounded. I was 
afraid to go to Tignor's myself lest i might arouse 
suspicion, so I got my friend, Corbin Warwick, to 
go there and get these pistols. Tignor sent with 
them powder and ball and a small powder flask, 
which had a very small powder measurer. He 
had told Warwick to use two of these measures 
when loading, but Warwick had forgotten to tell 
me that. When I came in with the pistols Colonel 
Smith called attention to the small charge of pow- 
der that the flask gave and insisted the charge 
should be doubled. But I insisted the man knew 
how to load his own pistols, and was so insistent 
about this that they all acquiesced. I saved Elam's 
life by it. The pistols were loaded with this small 
charge and when the parties fired Smith was un- 
harmed, but he hit Elam squarely on the chin, 
smashing that organ into tatters. If the pistol 
had had a full charge of powder the ball would 
have gone through Elam's neck and there would 
have been no more of Elam. Elam was unable 
to continue the duel and it ended there. 

My friends bought the pistols and had inserted 
into the stock at the breech a silver scroll on which 
is engraved, "To William L. Royall, from his 
friends. Col. Thomas Smith, Gen. Wm. H. Payne, 
Captain A. D. Payne, Bernard P. Green." They 
presented them to me, and I prize them very highly 
as a memento of four very dear friends who were 
as high and typical Virginians as ever lived. 



SOME REMINISCENCES 91 

The next duel that I was connected with was be- 
tween Richard F. Beirne, editor of the State, an 
evening newspaper published in Richmond, and 
the same Elam, editor of the fVhig, the organ of 
the Readjuster or Mahone party. 

When Mahone and his Readjuster party got 
possession of the State in the election of 1879, of 
which I shall give a full account further on, I saw 
there was no more chance for me in Virginia, so 
I pulled up stakes and moved to New York City 
to practice law. The feeling between parties in 
Virginia became bitterer In that political contest 
than It ever was anywhere In the world, I believe. 
I will tell all about it when I reach that part of 
my narrative, and I may, perhaps, be able to paint 
it so as to make those unacquainted with the facts 
realize to some extent how intense the feeling had 
become. 

I had been selected by the creditors of the State 
of Virginia to represent them In the enormous liti- 
gation that grew up between them and the State of 
Virginia as the result of Mahone's triumph, and 
I was in Richmond attending to some matters in- 
volved In that litigation. Bierne In his State news- 
paper had been taunting the Readjuster party 
with all the sins that we imputed to them, with 
exceedingly mild replies from the JFhig. But 
one morning the Whig appeared with one of the 
most insulting articles, aimed directly at Beirne, 



92 SOME REMINISCENCES 

that it is possible to conceive of. Belrne lived at 
Ashland, a village on the Richmond, Fredericks- 
burg and Potomac Railroad, about fifteen miles out 
of Richmond, and he read this article in the morn- 
ing before he came into the city. He Immediately 
wrote a challenge to Elam, and knowing I was In 
Richmond he sent it by his brother-in-law, a lad 
of about nineteen, to me, with the request that I 
deliver it to Elam and represent him as his second 
in the duel. Belrne then put a pair of duelling pis- 
tols into his buggy and drove off to Hewlett, a sta- 
tion on the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, where 
he could be communicated with by telegraph. 

The young gentleman delivered the message to 
me. "Now," said I to him, "I think this is pretty 
hard on me after the part I have been compelled to 
play In these affairs to drag me thus into another. 
This is a political quarrel, and I have quit Virginia 
and am no longer connected with her politics in 
any way. Belrne ought to have sent his message 
to one of the Virginia politicians, who are the 
people on whom this burden rests. However," 
said I, "Belrne must not be left In the lurch, what- 
ever takes place. You go and deliver this note to 
Elam, and tell him I will provide some one to make 
the necessary arrangements or will act myself." I 
then hunted up Capt. Geo. D. Wise, the member 
of Congress from that district, and told him some 
of them should take up the representation of 



SOME REMINISCENCES 93 

Beirne. He conceded it, but said he did not see 
why it should fall upon him. "Then," said I, "let 
us throw up heads and tails whether you shall rep- 
resent him or I shall." He agreed to this, we 
threw, and I won. 

I immediately sent word to Elam that I was 
ready to go on with the affair, and he sent to me a 
Mr. R. and a very notorious character who 
was called "J." This old fellow was said 
to have been imported from Missouri. He 
had only one eye, but cunning and craftiness lurked 
largely in that one. As soon as we met I said, 
"Well, gentlemen, when shall the affair come off?" 
They insisted that it should come off that after- 
noon in the vicinity of Richmond. "But," said I, 
"gentlemen, I have already told you Mr. Beirne is 
at Hewlett, forty miles from Richmond, and it is 
impossible for me to get him by that time." They 
insisted, however, that it must be that afternoon, 
and I Instantly suspected a little bluff. "Very 
well," said I, "you are two and I am only one. 
Wait here a few moments and I will get a friend 
so as to be on a footing of equality with you." I 
went out and brought back with me Captain Wise. 
"Now," said I, "I am ready for business. Do you 
still insist that the affair shall come off this after- 
noon?" They said they did. "Very well, then," 
I said, "I withdraw the challenge." They saw at 
once what I meant, which was that I would bring 



94 SOME REMINISCENCES 

Beirne to Richmond and renew the challenge and 
be ready to fight at any moment. Then they got 
reasonable. They asked me when I could be ready. 
I said they understood the facts as well as I did, 
but I would suggest that we meet the next after- 
noon at six o'clock at Hanover Junction, which 
was about half way between Richmond and Hew- 
lett. This was agreed to. Then I said, "What 
weapons shall be used?" They replied, "Colt's 
navy revolvers, all six chambers loaded. The par- 
ties to fire at the word, and if neither falls, to ad- 
vance and continue firing until one or the other is 
disabled." This was murder in the first degree 
without extenuating circumstances, but I accepted 
instantly. I then asked them at what distance the 
parties should be placed from each other, and they 
said eight paces. This tremendously increased the 
barbarity of the thing, because at only eight paces 
the length of the Colt's revolver removed all possi- 
bility of missing. But I accepted instantly. I then 
asked who should bring the pistols. They said that 
as they were the challenged party they claimed the 
right to bring them, and I conceded it. 

I should have said that when Beirne sent me his 
message he said that he had telegraphed for Page 
McCarty who was in Washington as the regular 
correspondent of his paper, and that he only de- 
sired me to act until McCarty arrived. 

Next afternoon I was at Hanover Junction be- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 95 

fore 4 o'clock. Soon after one of their represen- 
tatives arrived, and I asked him if he had brought 
the pistols. He said he had, and instead of the 
navy revolvers prescribed he produced a pair of 
small pocket revolvers that you could not hit a barn 
door with at ten paces. "Why," said I, "how is 
this? You prescribed navy revolvers and you have 
brought these playthings." They said they had 
been unable to find a pair of Colt's navy revolvers. 
I then sensed written notice on them that we re- 
fused to fight with the weapons they had produced, 
first, because they were not the weapons they had 
prescribed, and second, because they were not 
dangerous weapons. "But," said I, "Mr. Beirne 
has a pair of dangerous duelling pistols here of 
which he offers you the choice." This they de- 
clined, saying that the fight must take place with 
the pistols they had brought or not at all. By this 
time Beirne and McCarty had arrived, and I re- 
tired as manager of the affair. Beirne was so set 
upon fighting that he agreed, against my remon- 
strance, to fight with the small pistols, and just as 
all parties were preparing for the fight a party of 
Richmond police drove up and arrested us all. I 
never knew how the police got on to the affair. I 
know I did not let it out, and no one who knows 
Captain Wise will believe he did. 

Beirne was bitterly chagrined. While we were 
all standing around the depot and discussing the 



96 SOME REMINISCENCES 

matter, a train pulled up on the Chesapeake and 
Ohio, going west, and Beirne deftly stepped on it 
when the officers were not looking and sped off to 
the west. In a day or two McCarty and I got into 
communication with him, and he asked us to renew 
his challenge and have the duel come off in the 
Valley of Virginia where he was, and where there 
would be no danger of interruption. We renewed 
the challenge, and this time we got into negotia- 
tions with "J-" and Col. Joseph Minitree, 
a sure-enough Confederate colonel who had 
unfortunately gone off with Mahone. There was 
no bluff or humbugging about him. McCarty and 
I met "J-" a"d Minitree at the Exchange Hotel. 
When everything else was arranged I said, "How 
about the weapons?" "Oh," said "J." with a 
great air, "we have the right to furnish the 
weapons and we will provide the same pistols we 
carried to Hanover Junction," 

Now, the whole country was full of the Colt's 
army revolver, which was the weapon that both 
the Confederate and the Union cavali7 used dur- 
ing the war, and when the enemy prescribed "Colt's 
navy revolvers" at our first meeting I understood 
them to mean army revolvers, which went by the 
names indifferently of army revolvers and navy 
revolvers. But when they came to Hanover Junc- 
tion with little pistols they explained to me that it 
was the technical navy revolver that they meant, 



SOME REMINISCENCES 97 

and that they had been unable to find a pair of 
technical navy revolvers. That was the first time 
I ever learned that there was a difference between 
the Colt's navy revolver and the Colt's army re- 
volver. The "navy" is a shade smaller than the 
"army" but just as dangerous a weapon. 

So, feeling sure that Beirne was going to renew 
the matter, as soon as I got back to Richmond I 
instituted quest for a pair of technical navy revol- 
vers, and soon got a superb pair of them. I no- 
tified "J." that I had them and that they 
would be at his service when we renewed negotia- 
tions. When we had arrived at the point when 
"J." said they would produce the same small 
pistols for the fight, I said that was perfectly satis- 
factory to us, but it must be inserted in the cartel 
that we had got a pair of technical navy revolvers 
the use of which we tendered for the duel. "J." 
kicked violently against this, but I stood firm, and 
presently Minitree spoke up and said, "Oh, hell, 
'J.,' you have backed down, and why not say 
so!" Thereupon it was inserted in the cartel and 
stands there to-day that Beirne's friends had pro- 
cured a pair of navy revolvers and had tendered 
the use of them to Elam's friends, but that they 
had declined to use them and insisted on fighting 
with the small revolvers. 

The fight came off, and at the first fire Beirne 



98 SOME REMINISCENCES 

shot Elam in the thigh and the duel was stopped 
at that point. 

This ended my experience with duels. After an 
experience so elaborate as mine it sounds strange 
to hear me say I never approved of duels but al- 
ways detested them in my secret heart. The sys- 
tem was founded on coercion rather than reason, 
and coercion, in whatever form, I have always ab- 
horred. But one must understand society as it ex- 
isted in Virginia to understand my participation in 
them. It was the general understanding that the 
man who did not fight when he was insulted or the 
man who refused to fight when challenged had a 
smirch upon him from that time on. Some ten 
years before the civil war Mr. McGowan of South 
Carolina had a duel with a Mr, Cunningham in 
which McGowan was desperately wounded. Mc- 
Gowan became a very distinguished general officer 
in the civil war. After the war a friend of mine 
met him at the Greenbrier White Sulphur Springs 
and asked him what the duel between him and Col- 
onel Cunningham was about. "Well," said Gen- 
eral McGowan, "I never did clearly understand 
what it was about, but you know it was at a time 
when all gentlemen fought." Although, as I have 
said, I utterly detested the whole business, yet I 
should have challenged a man that I thought I was 
called on by public opinion to challenge and I 
would have accepted a challenge if it had been 



SOME REMINISCENCES 99 

given to me. Thank God the whole sentiment and 
opinion of the people has changed, and if a man 
killed another in a duel in Virginia now I think 
he would stand a very fair showing for the gal- 
lows. 



CHAPTER III 

THE STATE DEBT THE PRESIDENCY 

About 1830 the State of Virginia embarked 
upon the policy of aiding works of internal im- 
provement. She sold her bonds bearing six per 
cent, interest and subscribed to the stock of canals, 
turnpikes, and railroads. She paid her interest on 
these bonds regularly until the civil war broke out, 
but she paid no interest on them after that date. 
At the end of the war her debt amounted, princi- 
pal and overdue interest, to more than $40,000,- 
000. 

There was a bogus government of Virginia dur- 
ing the war at the head of which a man named 
Pierpont figured, which dodged about around the 
borders of Virginia during the war. Near the end 
of the war Mr. Lincoln recognized this as the gov^- 
ernment of Virginia, and in 1865 Pierpont called 
a legislature together. This body met in Rich- 
mond, and was composed of as fine a set of men as 
ever gathered together in the State. Virginia was 
prostrate. Her slave labor, on which her agricul- 
ture depended, was suddenly freed; the armies had 
destroyed most of her fencing and taken from her 
people almost all of their stock; there was no 



SOME REMINISCENCES loi 

money in circulation, and, in a word, the poor old 
State, ravaged and prostrated, was in the depths 
of woe and despair. The State's bonds were owned 
in the Northern States, but principally in England. 
Many communities in that condition would have 
taken the ground that as the money was loaned 
upon the faith of the slave labor, since the slaves 
were set free the debt would no longer be recog- 
nized. But that sort of action never came from 
Virginia when she was herself and this legislature 
was elected by the white people of Virginia before 
there was any infusion of negro blood into her 
body politic. 

In December, 1866, her Legislature unani- 
mously passed the following resolution : 

Whereas the public credit of the State of Virginia and 
the credit of our citizens has been injured and is now 
being injured by the apprehension that this General As- 
sembly will repudiate the debt of the State and authorize 
the repudiation of the debts of her citizens; and whereas 
we deem it important to remove this apprehension from 
the minds of all persons, and so to remove it at once; 
and whereas if the intention existed on the part of the 
General Assembly to pass any repudiating act the con- 
stitutions of both the State and Federal Government posi- 
tively prohibit the passage of any such law; and in order 
to prevent any further injury to our credit, therefore 

1. Resolved, That the General Assembly will pass no 
such acts of repudiation. 

2. That such legislation would be no less destructive 
of our future prosperity than of our credit, our integrity 
and our honor. 



102 SOME REMINISCENCES 

So spoke Virginia in her sackcloth and ashes, 
the last time that the real Virginia had an oppor- 
tunity to speak. 

In 1869 the wretched reconstruction acts of 
Congress had overthrown this true government of 
Virginia and had set up a government based almost 
equally upon negro as well as white suffrage. The 
white people of Virginia, however, controlled the 
Legislature. In 1871 the Legislature took up the 
subject of the public debt. When the debt was 
being created West Virginia was a part of Vir- 
ginia, being about one-third in point of population 
and territory, and Virginia had thought that as 
West Virginia had participated in the borrowing, 
she should take her share in the paying. The debt 
was then about $45,000,000 principal and interest. 
In 1 87 1 the Virginia Legislature passed an act 
which provided for Virginia assuming two-thirds 
of the debt and assigning one-third to West Vir- 
ginia. The act provided that if a bondholder 
would deposit his bond with the State of Virginia 
she would give him her new bond for two-thirds 
of the principal and overdue interest (the interest 
being capitalized), bearing six per cent, interest, 
and a certificate stating that West Virginia owed 
him the other third. As an inducement to him to do 
this the act provided that the new bond should bear 
tax receivable coupons to represent the interest; 
that is, the coupon bore upon Its face the State's 



SOME REMINISCENCES 103 

contract that It would be received for its face value 
in payment of all taxes, debts, and dues to the 
State, so that the State would be unable to collect 
any taxes until she had provided for these coupons. 
The bondholders jumped eagerly to the acceptance 
of this offer, and in a short time $20,000,000 of 
the new bonds had been issued bearing these cou- 
pons, which made a first lien upon the State's reve- 
nues of $1,200,000 per annum. When the fund- 
ing had gone to this extent the Legislature re- 
pealed the funding act and thus put an end to the 
funding scheme. 

This presented William Mahone, of whom I 
have given a sketch in the preceding chapter, with 
his opportunity. The negro vote nearly balanced 
the white vote in the State and the negro always 
votes solidly against what he thinks the white 
people faV'Or. He was as ready to vote for pay- 
ment of the debt as for the repudiation of it, or for 
the repudiation of the debt as for its payment; all 
he wanted to know was, which way the white 
people were going to vote, and then he was going 
to vote the other way. Mahone, knowing this, re- 
solved to start a new political party based upon this 
enormous negro vote. 

The people of Virginia were all ruined by the 
war, and even a slight taxation was excessively bur- 
densome to them. The chance was most favorable 
therefore for him to appeal to the white people. 



104 SOME REMINISCENCES 

The $1,200,000 of coupons that had to be paid be- 
fore any money could be raised for the public 
schools and for the charges of government re- 
quired a rate of taxation that was very trying, 
therefore Mahone, who had run his railroad into 
bankruptcy and been turned out of its presidency, 
now came forward with a proposition to "read- 
just" the State debt, which "readjustment" was 
nothing but an euphemism for a plan to repudiate 
a large part of the debt. He knew he could have 
all the negroes for his plan and all the worthless 
element of the white people, and he thought these 
two would certainly control the State. He got 
all the negroes and all the worthless whites, but 
he got also a considerable following of sturdy and 
honest white men, who, resentful of the proposi- 
tion to pay when the war had deprived them of the 
means of paying, refused to assent to the payment 
of the debt. 

But the serious question confronted Mahone, 
"How are you going to 'readjust' the tax receivable 
coupons?" No public declaration was made of 
the way this difficulty should be met, but the plan 
resolved on was that the courts of the State should 
be filled with "Readjuster" judges who would pay 
no attention to the fundamental law of the land, 
that is, the Constitution of the United States, but 
would make all rulings necessary for the exclusion 
of the coupons from the treasury. This became a 



SOME REMIiNISCENCES 105 

cardinal proposition in "Readjuster" policy. Party 
lines were drawn, and Mahone with his Falstaft 
party of Mouldy, Shadow, Wart, Feeble, and Bull 
Calf, and the white people of Virginia upon the 
other side, went before the people in the fall of 
1879 for the election of a Legislature. Mahone 
won and had a considerable majority in both 
branches of the Legislature, and this body pro- 
ceeded at once to elect Mahone to the United States 
Senate. 

I will suspend this narrative at this point to tell 
of some events that happened along here contem- 
poraneously with the progress of the State debt 
fight. 

When Mahone, through the negro vote, tri- 
umphed in the State, and placed the stigma of re- 
pudiation on Virginia's escutcheon, which had 
theretofore been without a blemish, I, in common 
with all other true Virginians, was deeply grieved 
and mortified. To try and stem the torrent that 
threatened to submerge all that was decent and 
manly in the State, I determined to abandon my 
profession and start a daily newspaper. I did this 
and established at the beginning of 1880 a news- 
paper called The Commonwealth. This is to be 
seen in the libraries at Washington and at Rich- 
mond, and it testifies for itself how I performed 
the part that I had set for myself. It is enough 
for me to say here that I made it very hot for the 
Readjusters. 



io6 SOME REMINISCENCES 

Along in the spring of 1880 the Federal author- 
ities commenced prosecutions against our judges 
for not putting negroes upon juries. This raised a 
profound sensation in the South, and it stirred me 
as deeply ns had repudiation. I went into that 
fight with my newspaper with all the vigor in my 
nature. The State carried the question before the 
Supreme Court of the United States, whether Con- 
gressional enactments that dragged her judges be- 
fore Federal courts were consistent with the Con- 
stitution of the United States. The Supreme Court 
upheld the acts of Congress, but Mr. Justice Field 
and Mr. Justice Clifford dissented. Justice Field 
in his dissenting opinion contended for a construc- 
tion of the Constitution that was so necessary to 
the poor, wounded, bleeding, downtrodden South, 
and that was so fair and just to all sections that I 
threw my hat into the air and called out to my fel- 
low citizens, "This is the man for the Democratic 
party to nominate this summer for President!" 
From that moment I put my paper to work to try 
and secure Judge Field's nomination. We had a 
primary election in Richmond to select delegates to 
the National Democratic Convention from that 
Congressional district, which was to meet at Cin- 
cinnati in June. I was elected to represent our 
Congressional district, with my dear friend Judge 
E. C. Minor, judge of the Law and Equity Court 
of the city of Richmond, one of the noblest fellows 



SOME REMINISCENCES 107 

that ever lived, as my associate. I had made a 
great impression with my paper on the whole 
South for Judge Field, and if the Pacific Coast 
had been for him he would certainly have been 
nominated. But from the time Judge Field had 
been made a Federal judge he had been smashing 
Dennis Kearney and his associates, and the Demo- 
cratic party of the Pacific Coast was pretty much 
composed of that element. When we got to Cin- 
cinnati we found the Field sentiment triumphant 
everywhere except amongst the Pacific Coast dele- 
gates. There we found the most determined oppo- 
sition to Field, and this lost Field the nomination 
and the Democratic party the election. I quote 
here a letter which I wrote from Cincinnati to my 
paper, the local coloring of which may still give it 
interest: 

Cincinnati, June 25, 1880. 

I feel that I have been delinquent to the readers of the 
Conunonivealth in not informing them before this of what 
I have seen and observed here. But the pack and the 
jam, the hurry and the bustle, the absolute confusion that 
has prevailed at all times and all places since I arrived 
must be accepted by your readers as my excuse. 

The convention has been one of the most memorable 
ever held in American politics. I should desei-ve to lose 
the confidence of my readers if I said I think the nomi- 
nation the strongest that could have been made. 

I have been warning the public through the columns 
of the Com?nonwealth for months against the danger of 
nominating a soldier. I have been urging upon it that 



io8 SOME REMINISCENCES 

the true strength of our fight was the fact that we were 
fighting for a government of civil law as against a govern- 
ment of force, and that to make a soldier our nominee 
was to emasculate in some degree the strength of our 
claim. The enthusiasm which we have witnessed here 
(and it has been something wonderful) since the nomina- 
tion was made has not changed my opinion upon this 
point. 

The place was full of Democrats, not Republicans, and 
the ten or fifteen thousand persons that we heard clamor- 
ing were but a fraction of the fifty millions of people in 
the United States. Holding these views I was the last 
member of the Virginia legislature to consent to the 
nomination of General Hancock, and I never did give my 
assent to it until he had received votes enough to nominate 
him. The pressure which I had to resist to this end was 
as much as I was able to endure. The call of the roll of 
States was hardly finished when it was obvious that Gen- 
eral Hancock would be nominated. 

Wisconsin, which had been divided, had moved to 
change her vote and make it solid for Hancock. This 
was the beginning of a general stampede. State after 
State arose and announced that her vote should be changed 
and made solid for Hancock. Every person in the im- 
mense hall was on his feet ; cheers rent the air. The 
Louisana banner, bearing a superb portrait of the Gen- 
eral, was rushed to the stand and waved over it ; the small 
banners that marked the location of the delegates from 
each State were snatched from their fastenings and carried 
forw^ard by enthusiastic men and grouped around the 
Louisiana banner; the whole enormous mass of human 
beings was absolutely mad. There was no sense, no rea- 
son, no judgment anywhere. The following incident is 
amusing and characteristic also. Coming around to the 
hall in the morning my colleague, dear old Ned Minor, 



SOME REMINISCENCES 109 

said to me, "Royall, I see a strong disposition to break all 
ranks and nominate Hancock. I don't believe in doing 
it and I am not going to be carried off my feet into any 
such scheme." "Minor," said I, "those are exactly my sen- 
timents, and I intend to stand out firmly against it." 
Would you believe it, that when the rush set in and the 
enthusiasm passed beyond control, Minor was one of the 
first to go over to Hancock? He was standing in his 
chair next to the West Virginia delegation and their 
banner was tied to Minor's chair. An enthusiastic West 
Virginian snatched the banner up and, in doing so, upset 
Minor's chair and landed him flat on his back on the 
floor. I looked down at him and said, "Lie there, sir, as a 
fit punishment to you for your treason." 

The Virginia delegation, equally carried away by the 
prevalent enthusiasm, wanted to have Virginia's vote de- 
clared unanimous for Hancock. All of them except my- 
self had agreed to it. My intimate friends of the delega- 
tion crowded around me and urged me by every considera- 
tion to come in. I refused to allow my judgment to be 
carried off its feet. At last I was told that he had received 
the necessary 492 votes and therefore was nominated. I 
then told our Chairman, Mr. Bocock, that he might an- 
nounce that Virginia gave her twenty-two votes for him. 
The confusion was so great that Mr. Bocock could not 
get the attention of the chair. He had to go to the desk. 
It then occurred to me that possibly there was a mistake, 
and I went to the clerk's desk and counted the vote and 
found that he had received only 470 votes. I rushed to 
Mr. Bocock and got near enough to exclaim to him just 
as he was about to announce Virginia as unanimous that 
I refused to vote for General Hancock, and he accordingly 
cast her last ballot twenty-one for Hancock and one for 
Field. Soon after that another State changed and another, 
and he had the necessary number, whereupon I told Mr. 



no SOME REMINISCENCES 

Bocock that he might announce Virginia as unanimous 
and it was then done. The Louisiana banner bearing the 
General's portrait being brought to the stand and waved 
in the face of the convention caused the nomination. A 
frenzy seized every one. Every one thought it indicated 
that he was nominated, whereas he lacked a hundred and 
fifty votes. Every one wanted then to be on the band 
wagon, and so ever>' one was then in a hurry to have his 
vote changed to Hancock. But for this singular coinci- 
dence I do not believe General Hancock would have been 
nominated. We have nominated a brave, true, chivalrous 
gentleman, compared with whom, personally, Garfield is 
a small potato, but I fear we have not developed the full 
strength of our cause. However, we want to see the 
journal that will do more loyal and energetic work to 
secure General Hancock's election than the Comnioii- 
ivealth. I believe that if the delegates from the Pacific 
Coast had backed Judge Field with anything like 
unanimity, nothing could have prevented his nomination. 
It was the unanimous sentiment of the delegates from at 
least two-thirds of the States that he was the man to 
nominate. Had his Coast come forward and demanded 
his nomination nothing could have averted it. But it 
was impossible to get anything like unanimity from them 
in his behalf. I found this matter to be just as I had 
expected. 

From the time of his appointment to the Supreme Court 
bench. Judge Field has been holding his court in Cali- 
fornia and smashing Kearneyism and Communism when- 
ever he could get an opportunity. That element of the 
Democratic party is his bitter enemy, and unfortunately 
for the Democratic party, it is largely composed there of 
that element. Those delegates who represented con- 
stituencies in which Kearney is thought a statesman could 
not be induced to support Judge Field. Kearney himself 



SOME REMINISCENCES iii 

was at Cincinnati working with might and main against 
him. It was generally conceded by the Pacific Coast dele- 
gates that he could carry the Pacific Coast States, which 
no other Democrat could, for the reason that what he 
lost in the Kearneyites refusing to vote for him he would 
more than make up from the Republican ranks. I always 
thought his nomination would have been the wisest thing 
the Democratic party could do, and I have seen no cause 
to change my opinion. The most notable action taken 
by the Convention was its exclusion of the Tammany dele- 
gates. As soon as it became known that the Tammany 
delegates would contest the seats of the regular delegation, 
it was obvious that the most serious fight that would take 
place in the convention (the nomination of President 
being left out of the account) would be before the Com- 
mittee on Credentials. This committee was to be com- 
posed of one from each State — thirty-eight in all — and 
the Virginia delegation conferred upon me the honor of 
making me their representative. We met at 8 P. m. of 
Wednesday, the 23d. Judge Comstock, Judge Amasa J. 
Parker, Mr. Moak of Albany, and John Kelley him- 
self appeared before us to represent the Tammany side, 
and Genl. Faulkner, chairman of the New York delega- 
tion, Mr. Fellows a member of it, and Ex-Governor G. C. 
Walker with some others represented the regular Demo- 
cracy. 

I listened carefully to the discussion and got at the 
real state of affairs. The Tammany delegates were dis- 
tinctly bolters and independents, and we could not have 
admitted them to seats in the convention without giving 
the sanction of the National Convention to bolts at the 
pleasure of every sorehead. Their case rested upon these 
grounds. The first was that they represented 77,000 
voters. We, whose duty it was to inquire what persons 
claiming to be accredited representatives of Democratic 



112 SOME REMINISCENCES 

constituencies were really so, could pay no attention to this 
fact in the absence of proof that their constituencies were a 
part of the regular Democratic party of New York, and 
none could be produced looking toward this. The second 
was a general summary of the grievances of Mr. Kelley 
against Mr. Tilden and of Mr. Tilden against Mr. 
Kelley. This could afford us no ground to say that the 
Tammany delegates were regular Democratic delegates. 
The third was more serious. They claimed that there was 
no representative of the New York Democracy at Cincin- 
nati, for the reason that the State Convention, that which 
appointed the delegation claiming to be the regular dele- 
gation, was called without any authority, and therefore 
that Tammany had taken no part in that convention. The 
ground upon which they claimed that the State Committee 
which called the convention had no authority to call it 
was that prior to issuing the call it had expelled five of its 
members and filled their places without any authority for 
so doing. The regular delegation made the following 
reply to this claim. They said that when the State Con- 
vention assembled last fall to nominate a candidate for 
Governor of New York, John Kelley and his Tammany 
delegates came to it claiming to be delegates. Their seats 
were contested by a competing delegation, and after hear- 
ing the contest the convention decided in favor of seating 
Kelley and his delegates and excluding the others. That 
they then took part in all the proceedings for organizing 
the convention, were put on all the committees, and 
five of them were put upon the State Executive Com- 
mittee which was to have charge of the party in the 
future. That when the time came for making nominations 
for Governor, one side put up Governor Robinson and the 
Kelley side put up General Slocum. That the calling of 
the roll was then proceeded with, and had gone so far 
that but three counties were to vote when, it being obvious 



SOME REMINISCENCES 113 

that Robinson would be nominated, Kelley and his asso- 
ciates rose and left the convention, and from that time to 
this they have maintained their separate organization. 
That the convention thereupon passed a resolution au- 
thorizing the State Committee to declare the seats of any 
of its members who adhered to the bolters' organization 
vacant, and that the five Kelleyites on the committee re- 
fusing to co-operate with the others, had been declared by 
them no longer members of the committee, and their places 
had been filled, and that the committee thus constituted 
had called the State Convention that appointed the regular 
delegates. This was the entire case, and as there then could 
be no doubt that the Tammany delegates had no sort of 
right to admission, I urged the committee, with all the 
emphasis that I could command, to exclude them and re- 
tain the regulars in their seats, and it was done by a vote 
of thirty-four States against four. The four dissentients 
made a minority report recommending the seating of 
twenty Tammanyites and fifty regulars, but the convention 
sustained the report of the committee by an overwhelming 
vote, and thus gave a decisive and most valuable lesson to 
bolters all over the United States. 

I must say that John Kelley made much the most favor- 
able impression on me of any of those who came before 
our committee. I had the impression that he was a vulgar, 
prize-fighting Irishman of the Alorrissey order. On the 
contrary, I found him a large-brained, cultivated man, 
with the manners of a gentleman and a self-possession 
without ostentation indicative of great reserve force. He 
made an address to the committee which, though he could 
make no case for his side, for the reason that no case could 
be made for it, contained many striking points. He placed 
himself upon an elevated plane and looked down with 
undisguised scorn upon the other side. He told one of 
their speakers, Mr. Fellows (their representative, with 
S 



114 SOME REMINISCENCES 

whom he shook hands the next day before the convention) 
in the most scornful and imperious style that he should re- 
quire him to confine himself to the truth. In speaking of 
Mr. Tilden he was especially lofty and scornful, saying 
something to the effect that if Mr. Tilden would only 
fight him fairly he would never have caused the breach 
in the party, "but," said he, "his methods of attack are 
always by some indirect and covered way," and he could 
never tell when he was to expect them. Whilst the case 
was being discussed, Kelley sat in most self-poised and 
rather dignified style at a window. General Faulkner, 
chairman of the regular delegation, was speaking, and he 
said he would ask Kelley whether he would support the 
nominee of the convention whoever he might be. Kelley 
made no response, whereupon Faulkner pressed his ques- 
tion, and the committee seeming to expect an answer, 
Kelley rose and with great power and scorn in his manner 
said, "If a gentleman should ask me that question I would 
answer; but to answer you, never." All the other repre- 
sentatives of Tammany said to the committee that they 
would support the nominee whoever he might be, and 
afterward Kelley on his own motion said that he would 
support the nominee whoever he might be, provided it was 
not Mr. Tilden, but that he would not support him. 

I may as well add here all I have to say regard- 
ing my newspaper venture. In the early part of 
the following September, when I had moved to 
New York to live, the National Democratic Com- 
mittee met in New York to notify General Han- 
cock of his nomination. It determined to call in a 
body upon Mr. Tilden, whose nomination I had 
been most valiantly fighting in my newspaper. My 



SOME REMINISCENCES 115 

friends, Senator John W. Daniel of Virginia, and 
Senator Jonas of Louisiana, insisted that I should 
go along with the committee to call upon him. Be- 
cause of the opposition I had made to his nomina- 
tion I was very reluctant to do this, but I finally 
yielded to their importunities. 

When we got around to his house we found 
Ex-Governor Stephenson of Kentucky acting as 
master of ceremonies and introducing each arrival 
to Mr. Tilden. I declare when I saw him I was 
never so shocked in my life. He looked like an 
electrified mummy, but just a little electrified. 
He was wasted away to a shadow. A great 
tall silk hat came down almost over his eyes 
and ears and his lower jaw seemed about to fall 
and leave his mouth wide open. His face was so 
emaciated it looked like the face of a corpse two 
weeks after death. He had his right arm across 
his breast and it was held up by an attachment of 
some sort. He shook hands with the tips of the 
fingers of his left hand, and he seemed hardly able 
to bring that left hand up to shake with. He was 
a little dried-up semblance of the man that had 
once inhabited his clothes. He would shake hands 
in a listless, lifeless sort of way with each gentle- 
man as he was introduced, much as if he did not 
know and did not care what was going on. Nev- 
ertheless, the old fellow knew exactly what was 
going on. When it came to my turn Governor 



ii6 SOME REMINISCENCES 

Stephenson said, "Mr. Royall of Virginia, Mr. 
Tilden." He brislced up at once, and catching hold 
of my hand he pulled my ear down to his mouth 
and said, "From what part of Virginia?" I an- 
swered, "From Richmond." The old fellow rec- 
ognized his enemy at once, and dropped my hand 
as if it had been a red-hot poker, and then he de- 
liberately turned his back on me. Daniel and 
Jonas were standing by and saw it, and I said to 
them, "See now what you have got me into. But 
come on, and let's get even with him by drinking 
his champagne," which we proceeded to do. 

Running a daily newspaper is a very expensive 
luxur}^ By the first of August, 1880, I had ex- 
hausted all my savings, and my paper not being 
self-sustaining, I had no alternative — I had to close 
it. With the record I had made fighting Mahone 
and his party and with Mahone and his party in 
full control in Virginia, I knew there was but little 
opportunity for me in Virginia. So I determined 
to close my paper and go to New York to practice 
law. I opened a law office in New York in Sep- 
tember, 1880. 

I will now return to Mahone and the debt. 

Though Mahone had elected a working major- 
ity in the Legislature in the fall of 1879, he still 
had a serious obstacle in the way. A debt payer. 
Col. F. W. M. Holliday, was Governor and he 
would remain Governor until Januai7 i, 1882. 



SOME REMINISCENCES 117 

He could be relied upon to v^eto any repudiation 
legislation that Mahone's Legislature might pass. 
Accordingly, it passed sev^eral such acts and the 
Governor vetoed each one. Repudiation made 
little progress, therefore, prior to January i, 1882. 
But in the fall of 1881 a new Legislature and a 
Governor were to be elected, and Mahone's party 
elected both Governor and Legislature. 

Before carrying the narrative further I ought to 
mention some of the pranks of the Mahone Legis- 
lature elected in 1879. ^ have already referred to 
the fact that the Mahone program was to fill the 
judicial offices with men who would kill the cou- 
pons without regard to law, order, or reason. This 
Legislature gave a striking object-lesson In this line 
of policy. 

At that time there was a judge for each 
county — 100 In all. The Readjusters put up a 
man named Claiborne for judge of Franklin 
County. This was where Gen. Jubal A. Early had 
always lived, and he knew Claiborne well. He 
came to Richmond, and In a written paper he in- 
formed the Readjuster caucus that Claiborne was 
a professional gambler, and not only so, but a 
cheating professional gambler; that he played the 
game of poker with a "lizard," which was an in- 
strument with a hand, concealed under the vest, 
with an attachment that extended down to the toe, 
and If the player was not satisfied with the cards 



ii8 SOME REMINISCENCES 

dealt him he could exchange it for those held by 
the "lizard." He said the "hzard" was then at 
a blacksmith shop for repairs, and he named the 
shop where the Readjusters could see it. Without 
making any investigation whatever, the Readjust- 
ers made Claiborne judge of Franklin County. 

In a short time Claiborne was indicted by his 
own grand jury for gambling on a race track. The 
statute under which he was indicted forbade 
gambling "at an ordinary race track," or other 
public place. The word "ordinary" has from col- 
onial times been the technical word for "inn" or 
"tavern" in Virginia. Claiborne got his friend 
Mays, whom the Readjusters had made judge of 
the nearby county of Botetourt, to come over and 
try the case. Mays held that the statute forbade 
gambling at an "ordinary race track," and that the 
race track at which Claiborne had gambled was 
an "extraordinary" one, and therefore not within 
the statute. 

After the election in the fall of 1881 the Ma- 
hone party were in complete possession of every 
department of the State Government, and they pro- 
ceeded to put their theories into the form of law. 
They first brought the debt down to little more 
than half, and they then proceeded to pass acts de- 
signed to kill the tax receivable coupons. 

Most of the owners of the State's bonds lived 
in England, and these proceeded to arrange for a 



SOME REMINISCENCES 119 

fight In the courts with the State upon the propo- 
sition that the coupons contained the State's con- 
tract that they should be received in payment of 
her taxes; that the Constitution of the United 
States forbade a State to pass any law impairing 
the obligations of contracts, and that her legisla- 
tion undertaking to prevent her collectors from re- 
ceiving the coupons for taxes was unconstitutional 
and void. The organization of creditors did me 
the honor of selecting me to conduct the fight for 
them, and I abandoned all other business to attend 
to this. I applied to a State court for a writ of 
mandamus to compel a collector to receive coupons 
in payment of taxes, nothwithstanding the State's 
statute forbidding him to receive them, and the 
State court refused to grant the writ. I appealed 
the case to the Supreme Court of the United States, 
which, to the astonishment and dismay of the 
creditors, sustained the State court. This decision 
produced a very profound impression upon the 
white people of Virginia. One of their chief argu- 
ments with the Readjusters was that the Supreme 
Court would break up whatever they did. Ma- 
hone and his party had now become avowedly a 
part of the Republican party and the white people 
believed that a Republican Supreme Court had 
made this decision to help along their ally Ma- 
hone. Instantly all the white people of the State 
resolved as one man to abandon the creditor and 



I20 SOME REMINISCENCES 

force the readjustment of the debt. From that day 
on I had to fight the entire population of Virginia 
and when I look back over the contest I am amazed 
at how I was able to sustain myself for eight years. 
The court had said in its opinion that the State's 
contract bound it to receive the coupon "when of- 
fered," and that no State legislature could interfere 
with the obligation of that contract. I insisted at 
once that had won me the case; that I had lost only 
on a question of procedure; that the coupon holder 
was not interested in making the State take the 
coupon into her treasury; that all he was con- 
cerned with was to offer it to the State, and if she 
chose to lie out of it it was her affair and not his; 
that all he was concerned with was that she should 
not molest him m any way after he had tendered 
the coupons, and if any of her officers did molest 
him thereafter he could make them pay him dam- 
ages. I at once announced this as the logical result 
of the decision, and had my announcement received 
with derision and ridicule by the great body of the 
profession. Nevertheless, I stuck to my guns and 
took other cases to the Supreme Court, and when 
the decision came in 1884 the Supreme Court held 
the law to be exactly as I had said it was, in an 
opinion delivered by Justice Stanley Matthews 
(Poindexter v. Greenhow, 114 U. S. R.). 

I now had matters in perfect shape for practical 
operations except for one thing. The Virginia 



SOME REMINISCENCES 121 

courts were filled with men put there to defeat any 
efforts the coupon holders might make. Although 
I had the law theoretically what I wanted it, how 
could I expect any practical relief from a Claiborne 
or a Mays? I had to get an impartial court or I 
could never expect anything material. 

The United States courts were impartial, and if 
I could only have my litigation tried there I had a 
show. But from time immemorial it had been 
the understanding of every one that the United 
States courts could try only cases when one party 
was a citizen of one State and the other party was 
a citizen of another State, and both parties to my 
litigation were citizens of Virginia. I took the 
position that when a question arising under the 
Constitution of the United States was involved in 
a case a United States court could try it if both 
parties were citizens of Virginia. I took a case in- 
volving this point to the Supreme Court of the 
United States and it said I was right. I now had 
a good cause of action and an impartial court in 
which to try it. I got people all over the State to 
stand on their tender of coupons, the collectors 
levied, I sued the collectors for damages in the 
United States court, and in every case I recovered 
damages. Matters were all running my way in a 
flood tide, and it looked as if I was going to force 
the State to pay her coupons dollar for dollar. 

I will mention one incident that will illustrate 



122 SOME REMINISCENCES 

how completely the tide was running my way. In 
her desperation the State was passing into a statute 
every scheme any visionary would suggest. So she 
got to indicting my clients for using coupons. Now 
men who will charge a battery can be intimidated 
by a writ. Men will not stand prosecutions. I 
saw at once the State would beat me if I could not 
stop these prosecutions, but how to stop them was 
the question. Suddenly it occurred to me to sue 
the grand jury in the United States court for dam- 
ages for indicting my clients under laws that they 
knew to be repugnant to the Constitution of the 
United States. The grand jury was composed of 
merchants, and If there is anything on earth a mer- 
chant detests It Is to have an announcement made 
that he has been sued. Accordingly, I sued the 
grand jury In the United States court for damages, 
and I made public proclamation that I would sue 
any other grand jury that Indicted my clients. This 
brought the Indictment of my clients to a peremp- 
tory ending. At the next term of the Hustings 
Court of the city of Richmond the grand jury made 
a written report to the court that they had abund- 
ant evidence on which to Indict Mr. Royall and his 
clients, but that he had sued the preceding grand 
jury and had announced that he would sue any 
other grand jury that indicted his clients, and that 
they therefore declined to indict them. This paper 
can be seen now in the records of the Hustings 



SOME RKMINISCENCES 123 

Court of Richmond. Thereupon I was indicted 
for intimidating the grand jury. I was tried, con- 
victed, and sentenced to pay a fine of $150 and be 
confined in jail for six months, and I was taken to 
jail. I at once applied to the United States court 
for a writ of habeas corpus and on the hearing was 
discharged. 

I had the State by the throat, and it was now 
only a question of months when she would be com- 
pelled to submit. But now happened one of the 
most unexpected things that could possibly happen. 
The Supreme Court of the United States, seeing 
the use I was making of the law it had laid down, 
released the State from my grip. 

Somebody, with an ingenuity of the type that 
is credited to the Devil, — there are a number of 
claimants for the honor, — got up this scheme: the 
officers should report the man who tendered cou- 
pons for his taxes and the Attorney-General in 
some cases and the Commonwealth's Attorneys of 
the counties and cities in the others should sue the 
person in the State courts for his taxes in the name 
of the State. The coupons were engraved simply 
— not signed — and their genuineness could be 
proved by expert evidence only. But the State 
provided that expert evidence should not be used 
on these trials. The coupon holder was sued for 
his tax therefore in the State Court, the State 
denied the genuineness of his coupon, and the cou- 



124 SOME REMINISCENCES 

pon holder was denied a means of proving his 
coupon to be genuine. Judgment would, of 
course, go against the coupon holder with heavy 
costs. When execution was issued on this judg- 
ment, if the coupon holder tendered coupons in 
payment of the judgment the officer was not to 
levy on his property and sell it. He was to report 
the fact to the Commonwealth's Attorney, who 
was to sue the coupon holder again, get another 
judgment, and add a second set of heavy costs. 
And this was to go on until costs were piled moun- 
tain high and the coupon holder would be broken 
by the costs even in depreciated coupons. 

When this act was passed I brought a suit in 
equity before United States Circuit Judge H. L. 
Bond praying for an injunction to restrain the At- 
torney-General and the Commonwealth's Attorn- 
eys from bringing the suits provided for in it, upon 
the ground that the law impaired the obligation 
of the coupon contract and was unconstitutional 
and void. Judge Bond granted the injunction. 
Thereupon the Attorney-General of the State and 
two of the Commonwealth's Attorneys violated the 
injunction by bringing the suits ordered. I had all 
three of them up before Judge Bond on a rule to 
show cause why they should not be punished for 
contempt of court, and after hearing the case Judge 
Bond held them guilty of contempt and sent all 
three of them to the Richmond city jail. 



SOME REMLNISCENCES 125 

The eleventh amendment to the Constitution of 
the United States provides that the judicial power 
of the United States shall not extend to a case in 
which a State is sued. Way back in the time of the 
United States Bank the State of Ohio had passed a 
law imposing taxes upon that bank intended to 
drive it out of Ohio. The bank sued her officers 
for an injunction to restrain them from putting this 
law into effect, and the Circuit Court of the United 
States enjoined them and put the Treasurer of the 
State of Ohio in jail for violating the injunction. 
This fact does not appear in Mr. Wheaton's re- 
port of the case (Osborn v. The Bank, 9 Wheat.) , 
but the original record shows it. The case was 
appealed to the Supreme Court of the United 
States upon the ground that the suit was in sub- 
stance and effect a suit against the State of Ohio 
and barred therefore by the eleventh amendment. 
The opinion of the court was delivered by Chief 
Justice Marshall and the decision of the lower 
court was affirmed. The court laid this down as 
the test in all cases where it was claimed that a 
State was sued. If the State was named upon the 
record as a party defendant, then the suit was 
against the State. But if the State was not named 
as a party defendant on the record then the suit 
could never be said to be one against the State. 
That was understood to be the law from that time 
forward, and a few years after the war the ques- 



126 SOME REMINISCENCES 

tion was again brought up before the Supreme 
Court In Davis v. Gray, i6 Wallace, and the court 
again declared that the rule laid down by Chief 
Justice Marshall in Osborn v. The Bank was the 
true rule. Backed by that rule I felt perfectly safe 
and had not the slightest fear that the State's offi- 
cers would be able to escape the shackles with 
which I had bound them. 

The Attorney-General and the two Common- 
wealth's Attorneys applied to the Supreme Court 
of the United States for a writ of habeas corpus 
to discharge them from their imprisonment, upon 
the ground that in putting the State's law, which 
was conceded on all hands to be repugnant to the 
Constitution of the United States, into effect they 
were In substance and fact the State, and that the 
eleventh amendment forbade the United States 
Court to enjoin them from putting that law Into 
effect. It was the cases of Osborn v. The Bank and 
Davis V. Gray right over again. The officers above 
were named as defendants and the State was not 
mentioned, so I had no fear whatever for the re- 
sult. But to my amazement, when the decision 
came the court, In an opinion delivered by the same 
Justice Stanley Matthews who had delivered the 
opinion of the court holding her bound on her con- 
tract, held that the suit was one against the State 
of Virginia and it discharged the officers from Im- 
prisonment (Ex parte Ayres, 123 U. S. R.). 



SOME REMINISCENCES 127 

I once heard the following anecdote : A man 
tracked a grizzly bear over mountain and dale for 
a long way, and suddenly gave up the pursuit and 
returned. When he was asked why he had aban- 
doned the chase he said, "The trail was getting too 
d — d fresh." When it was a mere matter of de- 
claring theoretical law the Supreme Court had no 
difficulty about giving the coupon holders all of it 
that they wanted. But when Judge Bond took 
them at their word and proceeded to put this theo- 
retical law into practical effect that was another 
story. 

I want to make it plain that the decision of the 
court in this case of Ayres was in direct conflict 
with what had been held by the Supreme Court 
from the foundation of the government, in case 
after case, up to the Ayres decision. Osborn v. 
The Bank, decided in 1824, was the first case, and 
I have already stated the mam facts in that 
case. The essential facts are that the old Bank of 
the United States had a number of officers in the 
State of Ohio and that the people of that State 
were determined to drive it out of Ohio if they 
could. To that end the Legislature of Ohio 
passed an act imposing a tax of $50,000 on each 
office that the Bank of the United States had in 
Ohio, and it directed Osborn, the auditor of the 
State, to collect it by warrant in the State's 
name. The law was repugnant to the Constitu- 



128 SOME REMINISCENCES 

tion of the United States, as the Supreme Court 
held, because a State could not tax the Bank of 
the United States. 

Osborn, the auditor, was about to collect this 
tax when the Bank applied to the United States 
Circuit Court for an injunction to prevent his so 
doing, upon the ground that the law imposing the 
tax and directing the auditor to collect it was re- 
pugnant to the Constitution of the United States. 
The Circuit Court granted the injunction, and Os- 
born, the auditor, appealed to the Supreme Court 
of the United States, where it was insisted for Os- 
born that he was in substance and effect the State 
of Ohio. The opinion of the Supreme Court was 
delivered by Chief Justice Marshall, and he held, 
as above stated, that a suit could never be held to 
be one against a State unless she was named upon 
the record, and the decision of the lower court 
was consequently sustained. In delivering the 
court's opinion Chief Justice Marshall said (9 
Wheat., 857) : 

It may, we think, be laid down as a rule which admits 
of no exception that, in all cases where jurisdiction depends 
upon the party, it is the party named on the record. Con- 
sequently the eleventh amendment, which restrains the 
jurisdiction granted by the constitution over suits against 
States, is of necessity limited to those suits in which a State 
is a party on the record. 

After the ending of the civil war the same ques- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 129 

tion came before the Supreme Court in the case 
of Davis V. Gray, 16 Wall., 203, and it received 
the same answer. Texas had made large land 
grants to a railroad before the war, and after the 
war the carpetbagger government of Texas at- 
tempted to confiscate these lands, and ordered the 
Governor of the State to make deeds to them. 
The railroad filed a bill in the United States Court 
praying that the Governor might be enjoined from 
executing this unconstitutional law. The Gover- 
nor set up the same defence, viz : that he was the 
State of Texas and that the eleventh amendment 
protected him from suit. The Circuit Court en- 
joined the Governor, and, on appeal to the Su- 
preme Court, it afHrmed the Circuit Court's 
decree. I quote the following from the opinion of 
the court (page 220) as follows: 

A few remarks will be sufficient to dispose of the juris- 
dictional objections of the appellant. 

In Osborn v. The Bank of the United States these 
things amongst others were decided : 

"(i) A Circuit Court of the United States in a proper 
case in equity may enjoin a State officer from executing a 
State law in conflict with the constitution or a statute of 
the United States, when such execution will violate the 
rights of the complainant ; 

"(2) Where the State is concerned the State should be 
made a party if it could be done. That it cannot be done is 
a sufficient reason for the omission to do it, and the court 
may proceed to decide against the officers of the State in all 
respects as if the State was a party to the record ; 



I30 SOME REMINISCENCES 

"(3) In deciding who are parties to the suit the court 
will not look beyond the record. Making a State officer a 
party does not make the State a party, although her law 
may have prompted his action, and the State may stand 
behind him as the real party in interest. A State can be 
made a party only by shaping the bill expressly with that 
view, as when individuals or corporations are intended to 
be put in that relation to the case." 

In the case of Poindexter v. Greenhow, 114 U. 
S. R., 270, Poindexter had tendered the State of 
Virginia's coupons in payment of her taxes. The 
treasurer, obeying the State law that required him 
to refuse the coupons, levied and seized Poindex- 
ter's desk in obedience to the State law to sell it 
and thereby make the taxes. Poindexter brought 
an action of detinue against the State's treasurer to 
recover his desk. The treasurer said he was the 
State and protected from suit by the eleventh 
amendment. The Supreme Court, following Os- 
born V. The Bank, said that as the State was not 
named on the record, the suit w^as not against the 
State, and It took the desk from the treasurer and 
restored It to Poindexter. 

In the case of Allen v. B. & O. R. R. Co., 1 14 
U. S. R., 311, the railroad had tendered the State's 
coupons in payment of Its taxes due to the State 
of Virginia. The State's officers were about to col- 
lect the taxes In money by distress warrants in the 
name of the State, when the railroad applied to the 
Circuit Court of the United States to enjoin them. 



SOME REMINISCENCES 131 

They also said that they were the State and pro- 
tected from suit by the eleventh amendment, but 
the court, following Osborn v. The Bank, decided 
that as the State was not named on the record, she 
could not be considered a party to the suit. The 
opinions in both of the last-mentioned cases were 
delivered by Mr. Justice Stanley Matthews, and in 
the last one, Allen v. B. & O. R. R., he says (p. 
314) : 

"The circumstances of this case bring it, so far as that 
remedy is in question, fully within the principle firmly 
established in this court by the decision in Osborn v. The 
Bank of the United States, g Wheat., 739." 

It may be possible to distinguish Ex parte Ayres 
from these cases, but to do it one must have the 
acuteness of the man in Hudibras. 

"He could distinguish and divide 
A hair 'twixt south and southwest side." 

Nothing less will do the job. In Ex parte Ayres 
Mr. Justice Stanley Matthews attempted to draw a 
distinction between them, but to my mind he made 
a most lamentable failure. He attempted to 
found the distinction upon two grounds. The first 
is that when the officer sued has no personal in- 
terest in the suit, but the State is the only party 
having a direct interest, she is to be considered the 
real party sued, although she is not named on the 
record. But all that had been considered by Chief 



132 SOME REMINISCENCES 

Justice Marshall in Osborn v. The Bank, and by 
the Supreme Court in all of the cases following the 
Osborn case, and, as stated by Justice Matthews 
himself, in Allen v. B. & O. R. R., the principle 
had become firmly established in the Supreme 
Court that the State was never to be considered a 
party to the cause unless she was named as a party 
on the record. 

In what respect did Osborn have more interest 
in the cause than Ayres. Neither had any interest 
in it. In each case the officer was simply executing 
an order that his State had given him by a law that 
was repugnant to the Constitution of the United 
States. 

In what respect was the State of Virginia more 
interested in having Ayres bring the suit she had 
ordered him to bring than Ohio had in having 
Osborn bring the suit she had ordered him to 
bring? I can see no difference in interest, and the 
same may be said of each of the other cases men- 
tioned. In none of them did the officers have any 
personal interest. In all of them the State was the 
only party having a direct Interest. Yet in all of 
them the court had adhered to the rule laid down 
in Osborn v. The Bank that the State was never 
to be considered a party unless she was named as 
such in the record. Justice Matthews's second 
ground for distinguishing Ex parte Ayres from Os- 
born V. The Bank and the other cases mentioned 



SOME REMINISCENCES 133 

was that In Ex parte Ayres the coupon holder was 
seeking to force the State to comply with her con- 
tract and to redeem the coupon. How he could 
bring his mind to this conclusion Is simply Incon- 
ceivable to me. The case was simply this: The 
State ordered her Attorney-General, by an act of 
her Legislature repugnant to the Constitution of 
the United States, to sue a taxpayer who had 
tendered her coupons In payment of his tax, and 
who stood upon that tender, refusing to pay any- 
thing else. The coupon holder aslced the United 
States Court to forbid the Attorney-General to 
bring that suit on the ground that the act requir- 
ing him to bring It was unconstitutional. He did 
not ask the court to go further and make the State 
accept the coupon in payment of the tax. He 
stopped with asking the court to keep the State's 
officer off of him. How can that act be construed 
Into an attempt to make the State pay the coupon ? 
It is solely a self-defensive measure. It asks noth- 
ing from the State. It asks simply and solely that 
he be protected In that isolation to which he is en- 
titled and that this officer be kept from molesting 
him In a matter as to which he Is entitled to quiet 
and rest. How that can be said to be an attempt 
to force the State to pay her coupon Is more than 
I can understand. The tax payer's position was 
that he had done his whole duty and was entitled 
to repose. It was nothing to him whether the 



134 SOME REMINISCENCES 

State got her taxes or whether she did not. But 
she had no right to molest him. The gist of Jus- 
tice Matthews's opinion on this point is contained 
in the following extract (page 502). He says: 

A bill in equity for the specific performance of the con- 
tract against the State by name, it is admitted could not be 
brought. * * * The converse of that proposition 
must be equally true because it is contained in it; that is, a 
bill, the object of which is by injunction, indirectly to com- 
pel the specific performance of the contract by forbidding 
those acts and doings which constitute breaches of the con- 
tract, must also necessarily be a suit against the State. In 
such a case, though the State be not nominally a party on 
the record, if the defendants are its officers and agents 
through whom alone it can act in doing and refusing to 
do the things which constitute a breach of its contract, the 
suit is still, in substance, though not in form, a suit against 
the State. 

When exactly those considerations were urged 
upon Chief Justice Marshall in Osborn v. The 
Bank, he came to exactly the opposite conclusion. 
I quote from his opinion (page 846) as follows: 

The bill is brought, it is said, for the purpose of pro- 
tecting the bank in the exercise of a franchise granted by 
a law of the United States, which franchise the State of 
Ohio asserts a right to invade and is about to invade. It 
prays the aid of the court to restrain the officers of the 
State from executing the law. It is, then, a controversy 
between the bank and the State of Ohio. The interest of 
the State is direct and immediate, not consequential. The 
process of the court, though not directed against the State 



SOME REMINISCENCES 135 

by name, acts directly upon it, by restraining its officers. 
The process therefore is substantially, though not in form, 
against the State, and the court ought not to proceed with- 
out making the State a party. If this cannot be done, the 
court cannot take jurisdiction. 

The full pressure of this argument is felt, and the diffi- 
culties it presents are acknowledged. The direct interest 
of the State in the suit, as brought, is admitted ; and had 
it been in the power of the bank to make it a party, per- 
haps no decree ought to have been pronounced in the 
cause, until the State was before the court. But this is 
not in the power of the bank. The eleventh amendment 
of the Constitution has exempted a State from the suits of 
citizens of other States or aliens; and the very difficult 
question is to be decided, whether in such a case the court 
may act upon the agents employed by the State. 

He then proceeded to announce the opinion of 
the court that it might act upon them notwithstand- 
ing that the State was the real party to be affected, 
and all the other cases cited above did the same 
thing. 

What now Is to be said of Justice Matthews's 
opinion that forbidding the officers of the State to 
do things that would be breaches of the State's con- 
tract is compelling the State to perform her con- 
tract? It Is absolutely Impossible to reconcile this 
with sound reason. When Justice Matthews 
forbade the State's auditor in Allen v. B. & O. 
R. R. to seize the railroad property for the 
taxes the railroad owed and had tendered 
coupons for, he was forbidding him to violate the 



136 SOME REMINISCENCES 

State's contract, but he was not requiring the State 
to perform her contract. He was leaving the par- 
ties just where he found them. He was requiring 
the State to do nothing. He was leaving it op- 
tional with her whether she would perform the 
contract embodied in the coupon or whether she 
would not. To say that that required her to per- 
form that contract is, it seems to me, to confound 
the most obvious distinction between things, and 
is equivalent to saying that twice two is five instead 
of four. To forbid Allen to seize the railroad 
property after the tender of coupons was not to 
require the State to perform her contract to re- 
ceive the coupons in payment of taxes, and, when 
that statement is made, all has been said that the 
case admits of being said. 

Justice Matthews's proposition ignores and dis- 
regards the consideration upon which the eleventh 
amendment rests. That amendment is founded 
upon the proposition that it is beneath the dignity 
of a sovereign State of this Union to be sued in a 
United States Court. That proposition may be 
one of little importance, but when the eleventh 
amendment was adopted the State thought it of 
sufficient importance to require that it be made a 
part of the Constitution of the United States. 
Now when Justice Matthews says that forbidding 
an officer to trespass upon me after I have tendered 
coupons is the same thing as suing the State and 



SOME REMINISCENCES 137 

forcing her to give me a receipt for my taxes and 
to receive my coupons into her treasury, he is abso- 
lutely ignoring the State's cherished exemption 
from suit. He is saying that it is a mere trifle and 
amounts to nothing and is not to be considered as 
an element in the case. But the States consider it 
a very great element in the case, and they will 
never admit that forbidding an officer to collect 
taxes by an unlawful proceeding is the same thing 
as suing them on their contracts and forcing them 
to perform those contracts. 

These considerations are so obvious that, for 
my part, I have always believed that the Supreme 
Court was Homerized in making the decision it 
made in Ex parte Ayres. 

All through its history the Supreme Court had 
been in the habit of declaring the law and seeing 
all the people of the United States at once 
adopt its declaration and base all further action 
upon it. It had never conceived it to be 
possible that anybody would refuse to acquiesce 
in its decision when once made. But the Supreme 
Court had never before tackled the people of Vir- 
ginia. They are the most obstinate, bull-headed 
people that ever lived when they think any one is 
seeking to invade their rights. You may some- 
times wheedle and cajole them, but you are always 
going to have a lively time when you attempt to 
drive them. It is like the question as to the best 



138 SOME REMINISCENCES 

way to lead a calf. If you put a rope around his 
neck and try to lead him he pulls back and drags 
you about in all sorts of ways. But if you tie the 
rope around his hind leg and get behind him, you 
can lead him along in a very satisfactory manner. 
No doubt the Supreme Court was perfectly amazed 
when it found out the controversy it had got on its 
hands in this coupon matter, with its dockets filled 
up each term with the coupon cases I carried there. 
In one of these cases Mr. Justice Bradley, in de- 
livering the opinion of the Court, said (135 U. 
S. R., 721) : 

If the influx of coupons should be so uncertain that 
no safe calculation could be made on the subject, an 
arrangement could probably be made with the coupon 
holders for limiting the proportion of tax which would be 
received in coupons. It Is certainly to be wished that 
some arrangement may be adopted which will be satis- 
factory to all the parties concerned, and relieve the courts 
as well as the Commonwealth of Virginia, whose name 
and history recall so many interesting associations, from all 
further exhibitions of a controversy that has become a 
vexation and a regret. 

Throughout the whole of the controversy the 
Richmond Dispatch, the leading daily newspaper 
in the State of Virginia, was incessant in its at- 
tacks upon the Supreme Court and the subordinate 
Federal courts for their course in the matter. It 
claimed that they were making decisions against 
the State in direct violation of the eleventh amend- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 139 

merit; that they were a usurping judiciary, and 
that the country should wake up and drive them 
out of office before they deprived the people of all 
of their liberties. There is no doubt that a consider- 
able part of the nation was giving attention to this 
clamor of the Richmond Dispatch, and that news- 
papers in many parts of the country were taking 
up and re-echoing its clamor. There is no body 
of men on the face of the earth that keeps its ear 
closer to the ground than the Supreme Court of 
the United States, and it is always glad to hear 
that the people approve of its actions and decisions. 

When Judge Bond put Attorney-General Ayres 
in jail the Dispatch went into conniption fits. 
"What! put the attorney-general of a sovereign 
State in jail! These usurping Federal judges 
should be impeached and discharged in disgrace 
from their offices." This was the staple of its 
clamor. 

Thinking that the court would be aroused to 
resentment, I sent a copy of each of these papers 
with the articles marked to each of the judges 
every day. But the anticipated effect does not seem 
to have been produced. 

At any rate the court commenced to trim Ex 
parte i^yres down almost from the day it was de- 
cided, until on March 23, 1908, it decided Ex parte 
Young, which in effect cuts away the last vestige 
of Ex parte Ayres. The United States Circuit 



140 SOME REMINISCENCES 

Court of Minnesota put the Attorney-General of 
Minnesota in jail for bringing a suit against a rail- 
road that a statute of Minnesota commanded him 
to bring for the purpose of putting that State's 
confiscating rate law in effect, and on his applying 
to the Supreme Court to discharge him, on the 
authority of Ex parte Ayres, the Supreme Court 
did not do a thing but tell him he might stay in 
jail. And if Ex parte Young left anything of Ex 
parte Ayres the recent Virginia rate case ends that. 

However, the decision killed my case as dead as 
Julius Caesar, and I told my clients they must settle 
at once. The State did not realize how badly I 
was hurt, and she had been so badly clubbed that 
she was in a very good humor for a settlement. 
A new settlement was made, which gave my clients 
a great increase upon what the State had been offer- 
ing them and this enormous controversy came to 
an end. 

I am very proud of the result. Unaided and 
alone, after a contest of eight years, I had driven 
the State of Virginia from her chosen position, a 
thing that it took the Federal Government four 
years to do, and it had to use a million of armed 
men, and at the cost of oceans of blood and four 
thousand millions of dollars. 

The court ought never to have departed in the 
smallest degree from the rule laid down by Chief 
Justice Marshall in Osborn v. The Bank. That 



SOME REMINISCENCES 141 

wonderful man had looked over the whole field, 
and with that remarkable prevision that nature had 
endowed him with he had no doubt seen that the 
greatest danger that threatened our institutions 
was the peril of the State governments falling 
under the control of men unwilling to be bound by 
those eternal principles of fairness and justice that 
rule in every government that hopes to endure, 
and he had foreseen that it was necessary to give 
such a construction to the Constitution of the 
United States as would prevent the States baffling 
justice by screening themselves behind their exemp- 
tion from suit as sovereigns when arraigned before 
the national tribunals of justice upon the charge 
that they were seeking to evade the obligations of 
the national Constitution. For that reason, no 
doubt, he brought the court to adopt the principle 
announced in Osborn v. The Bank. The history of 
the past quarter of a century proves how far-seeing 
and how wise the great Chief Justice was. The at- 
tempts of the States to confiscate the property of 
the railroads by cutting their rates down and by 
other devices of robbery show how necessary it is 
that the rule of Osborn v. The Bank should be 
adhered to, and the Supreme Court, seeing the 
dreadful blunder it made in the Ayres case, has 
come back now in fact, if not in name, to the prin- 
ciple announced by Marshall. The rule thought 
out and announced by the great Chief Justice in 



142 SOME REMINISCENCES 

Osborn v. The Bank is the most important an- 
nouncement ever made by him. With it in force, 
the States can never evade their obligations under 
the Constitution. With it abrogated they may go 
on evading one obHgation after another until they 
finally undermine and destroy the Constitution and 
the Union. The recent confiscatory rate legisla- 
tion fully illustrates the case. 

The following is not very relevant, perhaps, but 
I wish to relate it here, anyhow. It is well known 
that Mr. Justice Horace Gray, of the Supreme 
Court of the United States, was chief justice of 
Massachusetts when he was appointed to the Su- 
preme Court of the United States. At the John 
Marshall centennial he came to Richmond, Vir- 
ginia, and delivered an address on Judge Marshall. 
Conversing with a friend of mine, he said, "You 
know Judge Story was put into the Supreme Court 
to curb Judge Marshall in his centralizing tenden- 
cies. But he had not been there long before the 
great Chief Justice laid his mighty hand upon his 
head and made him his own." My friend said, 
"Judge, that is a good thing to put in your address. 
Do it." "Oh, no," responded Judge Gray, "there 
are too many Storys living in Boston for me to put 
that in my address." 

Judge Bond told me a funny thing in connection 
with the Ayres case. He said that one day Cham- 
berlain, the restaurateur In Washington, came 



SOME REMINISCENCES 143 

over to Baltimore and asked him to come over to 
Washington and dine with Henry Watterson, 
editor of the Louisville Courier-Journal. Bond 
accepted, though he did not know Watterson. 
When he got there he found Watterson pretty 
hilarious. Watterson put his arm around Bond's 
shoulder and said, "Bond, I was always with you 
in that Virginia fight, but did you not know that 
Uncle Stanley would go back on you?" He al- 
luded to Justice Stanley Matthews, and Bond said 
he found out that Matthews had some sort of con- 
nection by marriage with Watterson that caused 
him to call Matthews "Uncle Stanley." Matthews 
had delivered the first opinion of the Supreme 
Court which hurled defiance and death at the State 
of Virginia, and he delivered this last one undoing 
all of Bond's work and letting the State completely 
out of the difficulty. 

Bond said he replied to Watterson, "No, how 
could I know he would go back on me?" 

"Because he has gone back on everybody he ever 
had anything to do with. Did he not do so and so, 
and so and so. Did he not preside over the con- 
vention that nominated Greeley, and then vote for 
Grant?" 

Another Incident pertaining to this case is worth 
recording I think. The State of Virginia paid 
Hon. Roscoe Conkling, of New York, $10,000 to 
argue It for her In the Supreme Court of the United 



144 SOME REMINISCENCES 

States. Conkling was very reserved and 
haughty, and paid no more attention to me than 
if I had been a poodle dog. The argument he 
made before the court was on the level of a school- 
boy's, and after he had been speaking about half 
an hour without saying a word that was material, 
and without mentioning the eleventh amendment, 
which was the whole case, he said, "I believe that 
is about all that is to be said," and he was about to 
take his seat. But the Hon. John Randolph 
Tucker, who was the State's other representative, 
pulled Conkling's coat-tail and said in a stage whis- 
per, "But you have said nothing about the eleventh 
amendment. Discuss that" ; and he said, "Oh, yes. 
And I forgot to mention that we rely upon the 
eleventh amendment as a bar to the suit," and he 
sat down. When I came to reply I did a thing that 
the great man's worshippers considered sacrilege. 
I said no one had undertaken to defend the consti- 
tutionality of the Virginia act of assembly ordering 
the suits to be brought against those who had ten- 
dered coupons. "Of course," I said, "I do not 
take the humorous argument that has been de- 
livered here this morning seriously." Conkling 
had argued that the act was constitutional and 
thereupon I chuckled to myself, "I have got even 
with him, for his insolence, anyhow." 

Though not particularly relevant to anything 



SOME REMINISCENCES 145 

I have been talking about, I want to record here 
the following: I lived in New York City, prac- 
tising law there from 1880 to 1884, and I had a 
very considerable practice there. I am still a mem- 
ber of the New York bar and am still practising 
my profession there. I have been frequently asked 
what I think of the New York bar, and my answer 
is always that Its most noticeable feature, with the 
exception of a few individuals, is the fact that the 
New York lawyer thinks all the law is in New 
York. He thinks that the Legislature at Albany 
passes all the statutory law that is made, and that 
the Court of Appeals at Albany makes all the 
judge-made law that is made. 

I once met with a curious illustration of this. 
They had three huge volumes published in 1875 by 
Banks Brothers, called The Revised Statutes of 
New York, which were in every lawyer's office and 
were treated and considered as the authentic version 
of their laws. I have no doubt they were perfectly 
correct so far as New York law is concerned, at 
any rate, I never heard of their accuracy in that 
respect being questioned. But they undertook to 
print the Constitution of the United States at the 
beginning of the first volume, and gave the thir- 
teenth amendment to the Constitution in the fol- 
lowing language : 



146 SOME REMINISCENCES 

ARTICLE XIII. 

Section i. Slavery being incompatible with a free 
government, is forever prohibited in the United States; 
and involuntary servitude shall be permitted only as a 
punishment for crime. 

Now the thirteenth amendment really reads as 
follows : 

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except 
as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have 
been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States 
or any place subject to their jurisdiction. 

A trifle of this sort is a matter of no moment 
to a New York lawyer, since it concerned the laws 
of barbarians and not those of the city of Rome. 

As I have been reviewing the transactions of the 
Supreme Court of the United States so much at 
large, I think the following, for the truth of which 
I can vouch, though I am not at liberty to state my 
authority, should be recorded here. The case of 
Ex parte McArdle, from Mississippi, 7 Wallace, 
506, an appeal In a habeas corpus case, brought be- 
fore the Supreme Court In 1868 the constitution- 
ality of the reconstruction acts of Congress, those 
Pandora boxes from which such untold wretched- 
ness and misery to the people of the Southern States 
issued. The case was argued and submitted, and 
the court decided by a vote of five justices to four 



SOME REMINISCENCES 147 

that the laws were repugnant to the Constitution 
of the United States. Amongst the justices voting 
to declare the laws unconstitutional was Mr. Jus- 
tice David Davis, of Illinois. Mr. Justice Field 
was appointed to write the opinion of the court. 
He wrote it and brought it before the Saturday 
conference, and read it, where it was approved of 
by five justices. It was to have been delivered and 
handed down on the next Monday. Meanwhile, 
information had got out that the court was going 
to destroy all of these odious laws on the coming 
Monday, and the radical partisans in Congress had 
introduced a bill to take from the Supreme Court 
jurisdiction to hear appeals in habeas corpus cases. 
A motion was made by one of the four justices, 
after the opinion had been read, to postpone the 
delivery of the opinion from the following Monday 
to the next Monday afterward, and upon that mo- 
tion Mr. Justice Davis quitted his four associates 
and voted with his four adversaries, making five 
justices for the postponement, and that was accord- 
ingly ordered. In the meantime, the radicals 
rushed their bill through Congress, and when the 
Supreme Court met on the Monday to which de- 
livery of the opinion was postponed it found its 
authority to decide the case taken away from it. 
By this sort of juggling the Southern States were 
forced to undergo the awful tortures of reconstruc- 
tion to which the solid South is by far more due 



148 SOME REMINISCENCES 

than to the war. That noble old Roman, Mr. 
Justice Grier, filed this solemn protest against the 
proceeding: 

In re McArdle, Protest of Mr. Justice Grier. 

This case was fully argued in the beginning of this 
month. It is a case that involves the liberty and rights 
not only of the appellant, but of millions of our fellow- 
citizens. The country and the parties had a right to ex- 
pect that it would receive the immediate and solemn at- 
tention of this court. By the postponement of the case 
we shall subject ourselves, whether justly or unjustly, to 
the imputation that we have evaded the performance 
of a duty imposed upon us by the Constitution and waited 
for legislation to interpose to supercede our action and re- 
lieve us from our responsibility. I am not willing to be a 
partaker either of the eulogy or opprobrium that may 
follow and can only say: Pudet haec opprobria nobis, et 
diet potuisse et non poiuisse repelli. 

R. C. Grier. 

I am of the same opinion with my brother Grier and 
unite in his protest. 

Field, J. 

As I have said, I am not at Hberty to say how 
I know these facts, but I know them absolutely to 
be facts, and there are a number of other men now 
living who also know them to be facts. 

In the summer of 1888 my relations with my 
English clients required me to go to London, and 
I took my wife with me. She was then a very 
beautiful young woman of about twenty-eight or 



SOME REMINISCENCES 149 

twenty-nine. When crossing the ocean her 
steamer rug disappeared and she could not find it 
high or low. She reported the fact to me, and 
said, "I must have It produced." I said, "My 
dear, give the thing up. If I start after it I am 
going to run it down to the bottom, and that may 
raise a devil of a racket on this boat. Let the 
thing drop, and when we get to London I will buy 
you another one worth two of that." But, woman- 
like, she was not going to lose a steamer robe if she 
could help it, and so she demanded that I should 
go to the captain about it. "Very well," said I, 
"you see now what is going to happen." I started 
out to find the captain, and was shown him up on 
the bridge of the ship in the act of taking observa- 
tions of the sun with a glass. I went up the stair- 
way to him, and said, "Captain, some one has stolen 
my wife's steamer robe, and I come to you to have 
it looked up." He turned on me in utter amaze- 
ment that I should have had the audacity to inter- 
rupt him in the important function that he was 
engaged in, and said, "What do you mean by com- 
ing up here and interrupting me when I am taking 
observations?" I said, "I mean just what I have 
said. I want you to have my wife's steamer robe 
hunted up." "Go down from here," he said. 
"I'll have your wife's robe looked up." "All 
right," said I, "that is all I want." 

In a short time the robe was produced. 



150 SOME REMINISCENCES 

"Come," said I to two friends, "let's go to the 
ward room and take a drink on that. That's the 
way to hold the arbitrary tyrants up." We went 
to the ward room, and all three of us ordered our 
drinks. I noticed that the bar-keeper put the 
drinks of my friends before them, but put nothing 
before me. "Why, what's the matter?" I said. 
"Where is my drink?" "The captain has given 
orders," he replied, "that you are not to be served 
anything more on this ship." "The devil he has !" 
said I. "He thinks I was drunk when I called on 
him to produce my wife's robe. I was no more 
drunk than he was. But we will see about this." 

When we went out of the ward room I asked 
one of my friends to go back and buy me a quart 
bottle of whiskey, which he did, and I took it to 
my stateroom and had a drink whenever I wanted 
it. 

On the ship there was a man who forced himself 
on my acquaintance, giving the name of Thompson, 
and saying that Mr. Cleveland had made him our 
consul at Liverpool, where he had served all 
through his first administration. I had no means 
of finding out on the ship whether this was true or 
not, but the man said he had seen me often in New 
York at the New York Hotel, where I stayed while 
residing in New York. I did not remember him 
at all, but he knew all about me. He introduced 
me to a friend of his, a Russian count named Ga- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 151 

bousky, or something of that sort. In some way the 
two got acquainted with my wife, and they were 
most persistent in their attentions to us all the rest 
of the way. I had it in mind to try and organize a 
company while in London to develop the iron ores 
of Virginia, which are very valuable, and I men- 
tioned that fact to Thompson or the Count. Next 
morning, after arriving at London, the Count ap- 
peared at the Langham Hotel, where I was stay- 
ing, with a fat Irish friend, who insisted that I 
should come to his apartments in Piccadilly that 
night, when he would have Lord Idisleigh to meet 
me and his lordship would get me up the ore com- 
pany in a jiffy. I was a little suspicious, but I went. 
I found the Irishman and a friend of his playing a 
simple game of cards with a shilling for the stake. 
They wanted me to take a hanci while we were 
waiting for his lordship, which I did. Soon a 
Mr. Harrison arrived with his lordship's regrets 
that he was unable to come that night. Harrison 
at once took a hand in the game, and commenced 
raising the stake, and continued until he had made 
the bet a pound. Before you could say Jack 
Robinson I had lost $30. I saw I had been 
buncoed, and I put my hand down and said they 
must excuse me, that I was going to leave. They 
raised a great outcry, but I got up and put my chair, 
a stout oaken one, in front of me and commenced 
backing to the door. They looked as though they 



152 SOME REMINISCENCES 

were going to spring on me. I am a pretty stout 
man and can hold my own fairly well in a personal 
encounter. They looked me over and saw that 
somebody was going to get his neck broken if they 
advanced on me and so they refrained. I backed 
to the door, turned, and I scampered to the street 
about as fast as any man ever did. 

Upon the steamer we made the acquaintance of 
a gentleman named Schoen, from Pittsburg, who 
was going abroad with his two young daughters. 
Through us, our friends the Count and Thompson 
got acquainted with the Schoens. After staying 
in London a week or two myself and wife went 
over to Paris. Shopping there one day we ran 
upon the Schoens. Schoen asked me to leave the 
ladies shopping and go with him to a restaurant; 
that he had something to consult me about. He 
then told me that he had met with the Count in 
Paris, who had made himself very charming to 
them, and in the end had taken him to a musical 
festival of some kind, where the Count met with a 
very agreeable acquaintance of his to whom he In- 
troduced Schoen. That In the course of the even- 
ing Schoen had been In some way induced to take 
from his Inside vest pocket his pocket-book in 
which he had $1,500; that when he returned to 
his hotel he looked into his pocket-book and found 
there was nothing there but a piece of a New York 
Herald. He wanted me to advise with him 



SOME REMINISCENCES 153 

whether he should have the Count arrested. He 
said he had caused a detective to search his room 
and found nothing there but a pair of old soiled 
socks. I told him not to think of arresting him; 
that the authorities would keep him there to tes- 
tify against the Count and no one could tell when 
he would get away. He took my advice and pock- 
eted his loss. 



CHAPTER IV 

THE TRUSTS 

The beginning of public alarm in the matter of 
trusts was about 1890, though as late as 1897 I 
had not come to share in that alarm. I thought 
the judicial power if properly applied by persons 
having a correct idea of the common law principles 
applicable to the case was entirely adequate to keep- 
ing the trusts within their proper sphere, in which 
they would be a source of public benefit rather than 
harm. I am of that opinion still in spite of all 
that the trusts have been permitted to do that has 
so aroused public resentment. In the winter and 
spring of 1897 I prepared a pamphlet upon this 
subject in which I set out my views of it. Just as 
I was about to send it to the press the decision of 
the Supreme Court of the United States in the case 
of United States v. Trans-Missouri Association, 
166 U. S. R., 290, was announced. This was the 
case in which the court announced that it must en- 
force the Sherman anti-trust act just as it was writ- 
ten and break up "every" agreement that put any 
restraint upon interstate commerce. I had never 
heard that any such case was pending before 
the Supreme Court, and the decision when 



SOME REMINISCENCES 155 

announced was a great surprise to me. I at once 
saw that it totally ignored, if it did not run directly 
counter to, the views 1 had elaborated with so 
much pains and labor in my pamphlet. I went to 
Washington and read all the briefs of counsel that 
had been used in the case, and I saw there was no 
suggestion of the views I entertained in any of 
them. That was in the spring of 1897. Another 
case was to be argued in the Supreme Court in the 
following fall, which is now United States v. Joint 
Traffic Association, 171 U. S. R., 505, which in- 
volved precisely the same questions as had been 
raised in United States v. Trans-Missouri Associa- 
tion just decided. So I determined to publish my 
pamphlet just as I had prepared it, in the hope 
that its presentation of the case might have some 
influence in the decision of the case to be argued in 
the coming fall. I accordingly published it in 
April, 1897, and immediately sent a copy of it to 
each judge of the Supreme Court, and I also at 
once sent a copy of it to each of the counsel who 
were to argue the case coming on in the fall, 
amongst whom was Mr. E. J. Phelps, Minister to 
England, who had argued the case of United 
States V. Trans-Missouri Association just then de- 
cided, as before stated. 

At that time, what I am going hereafter to treat 
as the harmful trusts, that is, the enormously rich 
corporations that crush out all opposition to them- 



156 SOME REMINISCENCES 

selves, had done very little to alarm the public and 
to arouse the resentment against them that is so 
prevalent now. Accordingly, my pamphlet was 
principally devoted to a discussion of agreements 
between a number of persons, their nature, and 
their proper limitations. 

The theory I put forward, briefly stated, was 
this, in substance: If an act was good and legiti- 
mate when done by one person that act could not 
become bad and unlawful merely because it was 
done by a number of persons Instead of one person. 
That was the generally accepted theory at that 
time, but it cannot be denied that the tendency of 
the decisions of the courts since has been the other 
way. See Pickett v. Walsh, 78 No. E. Rep., 753, 
a decision of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts 
as late as October, 1906. I still think, however, 
that when the subject is properly treated it will be 
held that the performance of the act by numbers 
instead of by one is innocent if there be no evil in- 
tent and the object be in good faith to promote the 
interests of those participating in it. That an act 
must be judged by the nature of the act and not by 
the number of persons concurring and acting to- 
gether in performing it; that as one person could 
lawfully and properly compete in business with 
another person even to the point of wholly de- 
stroying the latter by fair competition, several per- 
sons acting together could properly do the same 



SOME REMINISCENCES 157 

thing, and, when co-operatuig thus, they could 
wholly destroy their rival in the business provided 
they did it by fair competition, however exacting 
the competition might become; that though one or 
inany co-operating together might compete with 
his or their rival in business even to his or their 
rival's destruction, so long as what they were en- 
gaged in was really fair competition, yet our laws 
forbade one or many from attempting the destruc- 
tion of a person, even though a rival in business, 
from ill will or malice toward that person. I illus- 
trated the distinction by quoting a decision of the 
Court of King's Bench delivered by Lord Chief 
Justice Holt two hundred years ago to the follow- 
ing effect: 

The plaintiff complained of the destruction of 
his "decoy" by the defendant having discharged 
guns so near to it as to drive away the ducks that 
defendant shot for a living. It appeared that the 
defendant had no occasion to shoot guns near the 
plaintiff, but did it simply and alone out of malice 
toward the plaintiff, and to do him a wanton in- 
JU17. The court held that the defendant had done 
the plaintiff an actionable wrong by that conduct 
for which he was liable to the plaintiff in damages. 
It is obvious, according to this decision, that pur- 
pose and intention in performing the act become 
decisive in such a case. 

I also illustrated the proposition by stating the 



158 SOME REMINISCENCES 

case of Mogul Steamship Company v. McGregor, 
a decision of the House of Lords of England 
(App. Cas., 1 89 1, p. 25) as follows: 

Several lines of steamships traded to China all 
the year round. The trade was unprofitable except 
in what is called the "tea season," when it was very 
profitable. The losses of the year were made up 
and a profit gained by the freights on tea in "tea 
season." Another line of steamers traded to Aus- 
tralia all the year until "tea season" came on, when 
its steamers were diverted to Hankow to get a part 
of the profitable tea trade. The lines which traded 
to China all the year round entered, therefore, into 
an agreement called a conference, by which they 
agreed to divide out freights amongst themselves, 
and they published a notice to all merchants in 
China that if they would ship everything all the 
year round by one of the conference lines, they 
would be allowed a rebate upon all freights at the 
end of the year of five per cent. ; and whenever 
one of the steamers of the Australian line came to 
Hankow the conference had a steamer there to un- 
derbid it on freights; so that whatever the Aus- 
tralian got caused it a loss. Thereupon the Aus- 
tralian line applied to the English courts for pro- 
tection, upon the ground that this combination of 
many against one was contrary to the principles of 
our laws. The decision of the highest court in 
England, the House of Lords, was that the agree- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 159 

ment was a perfectly good and valid one, upon the 
ground that no malicious and wanton attack was 
being made upon the Australian but that the con- 
ference was simply seeking to advance its own in- 
terests by fair and open competition. 

I quoted from the judges as follows. Lord 
Justice Field said : 

My Lords, I think that this appeal may be decided upon 
the principles laid down by Holt, C. J., as far back as 
the case of Keble v. Hickeringill, il Md. 74, and note 
to Canington v. Taylor, 11 East, 514. In that case the 
plaintiff complained of the destruction of his "decoy" by 
the defendant having discharged guns near to it and so 
driven away the wild fowl, with the intention and effect of 
the consequent injury to his trade. Upon the trial a ver- 
dict passed for the plaintiff, but in arrest of judgment it 
was alleged that the declaration did not disclose any 
cause of action. Holt, C. J., however, held that the 
action, although new in instance, was not new in reason or 
principle, and well lay, for he said that the use of a 
"decoy" was a lawful trade, and that he who hinders an- 
other in his trade or livelihood is liable to an action if the 
injur}^ is caused by a violent or malicious act. "Suppose, 
for instance," he said, "the defendant had shot in his own 
ground, if he had occasion to shoot, it would have been one 
thing, but to shoot on purpose to damage the plaintiff is 
another thing and a wrong. But," he added, "if the de- 
fendant, using the same employment as the plaintiff," had 
set up another decoy so near as to spoil the plaintiff's cus- 
tom, no action would lie, because the defendant had "as 
much liberty to make use of a decoy" as the plaintiff. In 
support of this view he referred to earlier authorities. In 
one of them it had been held that by the setting up of a 



i6o SOME REMINISCENCES 

new school to the damage of an ancient one by alluring 
the scholars, no action would lie, although it would have 
been otherwise if the scholars had been driven away by 
violence or threats. 

It follows, therefore, from this authority and is un- 
doubted law, not only that it is not every act causing 
damage to another in his trade, nor even every intentional 
act of such damage which is actionable, but also that acts 
done by a trader in the lawful way of his business, 
although by the necessary results of effective competition 
interfering injuriously with the trade of another, are not 
the subject of any action. 

Of course it is otherwise as pointed out by Lord Holt, 
if the acts complained of, although done in the way and 
under the guise of competition or other lawful right are 
in themselves violent or purely malicious, or have for 
their ultimate object injury to another from ill will to 
him and not the pursuit of lawful rights. 

The House of Lords held the conference to 
be a lawful one. As appears from the quotation 
from Lord Justice Field's opinion, purpose and in- 
tention were the pivotal facts In the case. 

I further quoted from several other of the judges 
to the same purport and effect as Lord Justice 
Field's opinion and I said that there was the test 
In all cases. If the combination Imposed no more 
than a reasonable restraint upon trade and aimed 
In good faith at bettering the condition of the par- 
ties to It, It was a good and lawful combination, 
however many might be the parties to It. But If 
the combination put an unreasonable restraint upon 



SOME REMINISCENCES i6i 

trade or aimed at doing some person a wilful and 
malicious Injury It was a bad combination and con- 
demned by our laws. The first was competition 
though It destroyed the rival. The second was not 
competition, but wanton Injury to another. All 
men then, I said, had a right to make any combi- 
nation or agreement which put no unreasonable 
restraint upon trade, and was not Intended to 
Inflict a wanton injury upon another, if the agree- 
ment aimed in good faith at bettering the con- 
dition of the parties to it. But no man had 
a right to form a combination which put an 
unreasonable restraint upon trade or that aimed 
at inflicting a wanton or malicious injury upon 
another. Freedom to make such lawful con- 
tracts was, then, I said, of the very essence of 
citizenship and that "liberty" which is guaran- 
teed to the citizen against State action by the 
fourteenth amendment, which forbids a State 
to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property 
without due process of law; and against Con- 
gressional action by the fifth amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States, which forbids 
Congress to deprive persons of life, liberty, or 
property without due process of law. This, I said, 
was the test that should be applied in the argu- 
ment that was to come on In the fall In the case of 
United States v. Joint Traffic Association. If the 
agreement between the railroads that was attacked 

II 



i62 SOME REMINISCENCES 

In that case was no more than a reasonable re- 
straint upon trade and was one In which the rail- 
roads aimed in good faith at bettering their own 
condition and had no purpose to do a wanton In- 
jury to another, the agreement was one in har- 
mony with the spirit and essence of our laws, and 
protected from hostile Congressional action by the 
fifth amendment — as one of the "liberties" guar- 
anteed to the citizen by the Constitution, and If 
the act really Intended to forbid "every" contract 
that restrained trade It was void, as under the 
modern law reasonable contracts In restraint of 
trade may be made, and the right to make them 
is one of the "liberties" guaranteed to the citizen 
by the Constitution of the United States. The 
trusts, I insisted, were to be viewed and treated 
from this standpoint. Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 
U. S. R., 578; Lochner v. New York, 198 U. S. 
R., 45. 

Without making any sort of acknowledgment 
to me, Mr. E. J. Phelps took my ideas from my 
pamphlet and Incorporated them, without my 
knowledge, in the brief that he presented to the 
Supreme Court in the case of United States v. Joint 
Traffic Association already spoken of. Mr. 
Phelps is now dead and cannot speak for himself, 
and this Is such a serious charge that I feel com- 
pelled to quote from his brief In support of the 
charge. He says at pp. 38, 39: "A just freedom 



SOME REMINISCENCES 163 

of contract in lawful business is one of the most 
important rights reserved to the citizen under the 
general term of 'liberty,' for all human industry 
depends upon such freedom for its fair reward." 
We had heard nothing of that in the preceding 
case of United States v. Trans-Missouri Associa- 
tion, although Mr. Phelps was one of the counsel 
who argued it and filed a brief in it, and that was 
one of the principal points that I had written my 
pamphlet to establish. On page 18 he said: 

In the anti-trust act the plain object is to reach and put 
down mischievous trusts in restraint of trade and monop- 
olies. 

We had heard nothing of that in the previous 
argument and that was the principal thing that 
I had written my pamphlet to prove. On page 43 
he says : 

The question in the present case is whether the agree- 
ment here under consideration is one that may be pro- 
hibited by legislation, without infringing the freedom 
of contract and the right of property which the Constitu- 
tion declares and protects. 

On page 57 he says: 

The considerations that are thus seen to attend and 
control the discussion of the subject conduct by in- 
evitable logic to this conclusion : The true test of the 
constitutionality of a law ivhich abridges the freedom of 
contract must necessarily be found in the reasonableness 



1 64 SOME REMINISCENCES 

and justice of the contract abridged. The power of the 
legislature to prevent unjust and mischievous contracts 
where the public welfare requires it, must be admitted. 
The constitutional prohibition against the deprivation of 
liberty and property does not prohibit such a law, because 
the freedom to make contracts of that character is not a 
part of the liberty of the citizen, nor is it a right of prop- 
erty. But when the contract which a statute undertakes to 
forbid is not unjust or unreasonable, and is one that the 
general principles of law and morality sanction, and 
much more when it is seen to be necessary to the lawful 
enjoyment of lawful property, then the constitutional 
prohibition designated as a protection against precisely such 
legislation, is directly encountered.* * * This, then, must 
be the criterion: Is the contract sought to be pro- 
hibited one that by the general principles of law and jus- 
tice it is the right of the party to make\ or is it unjust, un- 
reasonable and mischievous and therefore unlawful? 

The italics are Mr. Phelps's. 

Almost all of Mr. Phelps's brief is devoted to 
establishing these propositions, although there was 
no suggestion of them in his argument of the pre- 
ceding case, and these are the Identical propositions 
that my pamphlet was written to establish. Mr. 
Phelps says of these propositions at p. 58: 

This point was not made on the argument of the Trans- 
Missouri case because no such construction of the act was 
anticipated by counsel, nor was it considered by the court, 
since it is an unvarying rule that no objection to the con- 
stitutionality of a law will be considered unless raised by 
the party affected. 



SOME REMINISCENCES 165 

I think it would have been far more candid in 
Mr. Phelps if he had said the points were not 
made on the preceding argument because he had 
never then seen Mr. Royall's pamphlet, and as to 
what he says of the court not considering the con- 
stitutionality of a law unless raised by counsel, I 
never heard of that rule before. On the contrary, 
it is the doctrine of the court that the unconstitu- 
tionality of a law is a jurisdictional question (Ex 
parte Yarborough, no U. S. R., 651), and a 
further doctrine is that the court will always raise 
a jurisdictional question itself. (M. C. & L. Ry. 
•1'. Swan, III U. S. R., 379.) 

When the court came to decide the case it gave 
this stinging rebul<.e to Mr. Phelps : 

Regarding the two agreements as alike in their main 
and material features, we are brought to an examination 
of the question of the constitutionality of the act, con- 
strued as it has been in the Trans-Missouri case. It is 
worthy of remark that this question was never raised or 
hinted at upon the argument of that case, although, if the 
respondent's present contention be sound it would have 
furnished a conclusive objection to the enforcement of the 
act as construed. The fact that not one of the many 
astute and able counsel for the transportation companies 
in that case raised an objection of so conclusive a char- 
acter, if well founded, is strong evidence that the reasons 
showing the invalidity of the act as construed do not lie 
upon the surface and were not then apparent to those 
counsel. 



i66 SOME REMINISCENCES 

It looks as If the court had read the pamphlet 
and saw through the whole transaction. 

If Mr. Phelps, instead of pirating my pamphlet, 
had conferred with me about the best way of put- 
ting my views before the court, he might have won 
his case, for the court, when it came to decide the 
case, yielded in great part to the argument of the 
pamphlet, but It was held that the power of Con- 
gress to regulate commerce among the States over- 
rode even the guaranteed "liberty" of the citizen 
to make Innocent contracts. That, however, if 
properly treated could have been got out of the 
way. The decision is of vast importance in this 
controversy as illustrating the unbounded power of 
Congress in the matter of regulating Interstate 
commerce. But the point I made as the means of 
regulating the trusts has never yet been passed on 
by the Supreme Court and it still remains to be ad- 
judicated, and I have an abiding confidence that in 
view of the absolute necessity for an abridgment 
of the Sherman law, as I am going to show farther 
on, that If a case were got properly before the 
Supreme Court without Mr. Phelps's botches of 
the argument, a modification of previous doctrines 
that would give relief would be secured. 

It must not be supposed that I have digressed 
Into this Phelps incident to glorify myself and en- 
deavor to show that I first thought this matter out 
and placed it upon its true foundation. That was 



SOME REMINISCENCES 167 

far from my purpose. I have gone Into It In order 
that I may bring out plainly and distinctly propo- 
sitions for which I shall contend when I come to 
discuss the subject more In detail. 

Notwithstanding the fact that the trusts have so 
outrageously abused their rights and privileges 
since my pamphlet was published, I adhere to all 
that was said In It, and I still submit that the lead- 
ing Ideas of that pamphlet contain the true lines 
of the trusts' rights and the true suggestions of 
how they should be controlled so as to render them 
harmless to the people, while preserving to them 
all of their just rights. 

There Is one Incidental matter, however, that 
should be understood here. Purpose and intention 
are made by my pamphlet the criterion of whether 
an act is good or bad, and the decision of the 
House of Lords In the Mogul Steamship case was 
accepted by the world as an endorsement of that 
proposition. But In a few years after the Mogul 
Steamship case was decided the House of Lords 
decided the case of Allen v. Flood (App. Cas., 
1898, p. 74), which seemed to overrule the Mo- 
gul case, and It threw the whole subject again Into 
confusion. The decision In this case was that pur- 
pose and Intention were of no consequence In de- 
termining whether an act was good or bad. This 
decision produced consternation amongst those 
who had to deal with this subject, and It gave rise 



i68 SOME REMINISCENCES 

to the sharpest and most hostile criticism. The 
profession seems to regard It as overturned by the 
subsequent case of Quinn v. Letham (App. Cas., 
1901, p. 534), which Is regarded as re-establishing 
the doctrine of the Mogul Steamship case, and the 
still subsequent case of GIblln v. The National 
Union (1903, 2 K. B., 600) seems to regard the 
doctrine of the Mogul case as the law. 

But the American courts seem unanimously dis- 
posed to repudiate Allen v. Flood and to follow 
the Mogul case. Allen v. Flood was distinctly 
repudiated by the Supreme Court of Illinois in 
Doremus v. Henessey (43 L. R. A., 797), by 
the Supreme Court of Wisconsin In State v. Dur- 
ner (62 L. R. A., 744), by the Supreme Court of 
Massachusetts in Plant v. Woods (51 L. R. A., 
339. See Gray v. Building Council, 63 L. R. A., 
758), by the Supreme Court of Georgia In Em- 
ploying Club V. De Brosser Co. (69 L. R. A., 
95), and the doctrine that a malicious or evil in- 
tent will make an act unlawful when it might other- 
wise be lawful Is sanctioned by many of the State 
courts and by the Supreme Court of the United 
States In Angle v. St. P. R. R., 151 U. S. R., i. 

So that I think I can fairly say that it Is the 
common law of this country that if an act Is 
clothed with a good Intent It may be a lawful act, 
and yet if It be done with an evil or malicious In- 
tent it may become an unlawful act; and this is a 



SOME REMINISCENCES 169 

point to be borne carefully in mind while consid- 
ering what follows. 

I come now to deal with the case of enormously 
rich and powerful corporations which crush out all 
opposition to themselves by the use of their brute 
power. These are the trusts which have so mad- 
dened the people, and these are the trusts that it 
should be the earnest purpose of all of our au- 
thorities to control and force to operate within 
their legitimate lines. 

The thing that the public has a right to com- 
plain of in the action of these rich corporations is 
their giving their goods away or selling them be- 
low cost, which is pro tanto the same thing, for the 
purpose of destroying a weak rival and driving 
him out of business. No doubt every citizen can 
point, in his own experience, to cases of this kind 
that have come under his personal observation. I 
have seen many cases of it. Two or three years 
back a corporation was organized where, in part, I 
live, to sell and carry petroleum oil around in the 
cities of Manchester and Richmond to customers. 
As soon as the company had established itself and 
was really beginning to do business it, of course, at- 
tracted the attention of a great oil company. This 
put it under a regular and thorough system of 
espionage. It had detectives to follow the first 
named company's wagons and find out just where 
it sold oil. Then it sent its own wagons around 



I70 SOME REMINISCENCES 

to those parties and offered them oil always far 
below the other's prices, and it kept this up until 
the first-named company saw it would certainly be 
destroyed, when it sold out to the other oil com- 
pany at what it could get. Where I live is one of 
a great tobacco company's favored regions. I 
have seen processes like that above described put 
into operation in this territory by that company 
until it made the blood of every self-respecting citi- 
zen boil with indignation. 

I have known attempts to be made to defend 
this course of action in these rich corporations. 
Their advocates have said. May a man not give 
away what is his own? Shall there not be bargain 
counters where the merchant may sell his old stock 
at what he can get? May a man not give his goods 
away to advertise his business? Undoubtedly all 
of these things may be done when the act is per- 
formed for the purpose named. But this is the 
point where the purpose and intent so strongly 
dwelt on heretofore come into play. When a 
man gives his goods away because he is a charitable 
man, or has a bargain counter to sell off his old 
stock, or sells his goods below cost to advertise 
them, that is one thing. When he gives his goods 
away or sells them below cost for the purpose of 
destroying his rival and driving him out of busi- 
ness, that is a very different thing. They are dif- 
ferent by reason of the purpose and intent. The 



SOME REMINISCENCES 171 

first act is perfectly legitimate and proper, the 
second is illegitimate, unfair, unreasonable, and 
opposed to the elementary principles of our laws 
which command that while you live you shall let 
live. 

A combination of persons or a very rich cor- 
poration while confining itself to fair and legiti- 
mate competition, has a right to make all the 
money it can make, and the more it makes the bet- 
ter it is for society. Our rich men are our strength. 
They furnish the capital for the new and great 
enterprises that help every one and make the coun- 
try strong and great. It is for the interest of the 
public to see men grow as rich, in a fair way, as 
it is possible for them to become. But giving 
goods away for the purpose of destroying a rival 
is not fair competition. It is not competition at all. 
It is the exercise of brute force for an unworthy ob- 
ject. There is no such thing as "competition" un- 
less both competitors sell their goods for more than 
they cost. It is not a matter of much moment how 
much is added to the cost. One may be satisfied 
with a small profit and another may want a larger 
one. But the goods must be sold at something 
more than the cost or the transaction is not busi- 
ness and competition, unless in the excepted cases 
of selling off old stock or in good faith advertising 
the business. 

At a meeting of the American Bar Association 



172 SOME REMINISCENCES 

at Hot Springs, Virginia, in 1903, I presented a 
paper in which I pointed out these considerations 
(see Report of American Bar Association for 
1903, p. 27), and I urged the Association to take 
the matter up and throw the powerful weight of its 
endorsement in favor of united action to force a 
discontinuance of this practice. If the Association 
had taken the subject up I have no doubt the coun- 
try would have got relief before this time. But 
the Association seemed indifferent to the matter and 
nothing came of it. Perhaps it contained too many 
"trust" lawyers. This, however, is the objective 
point. This is the citadel to be assailed. The evil 
that has grown up In the country is the practice 
of the rich and powerful corporations in giving 
their goods away to destroy a weak rival, and that 
is the practice to be broken up. When we find a 
way to put an effectual ending to that practice we 
shall cure the trust evil. Until we do that the 
country will suffer from the trust evil while it 
grows worse and worse, if it does not, in the end, 
swamp our civilization. To cure the evil we must 
look at it from the standpoint of the common law, 
that is from the standpoint of the nature of things. 
In the preceding discussion I have treated the 
common law view of the subject and shown that 
the common law will not tolerate a man doing an 
act injurious to another when he is merely and 
simply animated by a malicious purpose to injure 



SOME REMINISCENCES 173 

that other. The word "malice" is a word of very 
broad signification in the law. An act to be ma- 
licious need not be inspired by personal ill will or 
hatred. It is enough, in the eyes of the law, to 
make it malicious if it is one taken in wanton or 
reckless disregard of another man's rights. The 
legal definition of malice made by Mr. Justice Bay- 
ley in Bromage v. Prosser (4 B. & C, 255) is uni- 
versally accepted as the correct definition of it. 
"Malice," said he, "in common acceptance means 
ill will against a person, but in its legal sense it 
means a wrongful act done intentionally, without 
just cause or excuse." Every such act as that is 
in the eye of the law malicious. 

Now, for the great trusts to sell their goods in 
the way of business at a very small profit is com- 
petition with a rival. But for them to give their 
goods away, or sell them below cost or at such a 
trifling advance over cost as to be in effect selling 
them at cost for the purpose and with the intent 
of destroying that rival and driving him out of 
business is not competition, but the doing of a 
"wrongful act intentionally without just cause or 
excuse" and therefore malicious in the eye of the 
law, for the act cannot benefit them and can only 
harm the rival. 

It is answered to this that they look for a benefit 
when they shall have driven the rival out of busi- 
ness. But the benefit is not the direct result of the 



174 SOME REMINISCENCES 

act, but only the indirect and remote result of It. 
The direct result is the destruction of the rival, 
and any benefit that may come to them will be the 
result of other acts done after the rival is destroyed. 
It is in effect the principle discussed by the Su- 
preme Court of the United States in the E. C. 
Knight case and the Hopkins case, where the court 
points out that the restraint upon commerce in 
those cases is not the direct effect, but only the in- 
direct effect of the agreements, and therefore the 
agreements were not within the meaning of the 
act of Congress that denounces "agreements in re- 
straint of trade." 

The act is therefore wrongful, because though 
an act they would have a right to perform if done 
with a worthy intent, it is an act injurious to an- 
other and done with the purpose and intention of 
injuring that other and of no sort of benefit to the 
actor. It measures up exactly to Lord Holt's 
duck case, which contains the whole law of com- 
petition. Nothing has been added to the discus- 
sion since Lord Holt decided that case, and the 
doctrine he announced has stood like a granite wall 
ever since he announced it. And that doctrine is 
that an act may be good and lawful when done 
with an honest intent and may yet be bad and un- 
lawful when done with a dishonest intent which is 
malice in the eye of the law. The Supreme Court 
of Massachusetts has very recently come very near 



SOME REMINISCENCES 175 

to endorsing this idea, if it has not actually done 
so, in the case of Pickett v. Walsh, 78 No. E. 
Rep., p. 753, decided in October, 1906. 

It will now be seen why I dwelt with so much 
emphasis upon the importance of purpose and in- 
tention. It is the crux of the case. When the trust 
gives its goods away as an honest gift, made in 
good faith, as a gift, it is within its plain right. 
When it sells them below cost in good faith to ad- 
vertise its goods it is within its plain rights. But 
w^hen it gives them away or sells them below cost 
with the pui-pose and intention of destroying its 
weak rival and driving him out of business it is not 
within its rights, it is trespassing upon its rival's 
rights, and it is doing that rival a common law in- 
jury and a wrong, which the courts ought to take 
cognizance of. My pamphlet of 1897 put the case 
correctly then in saying parties had a right to do 
anything intended in good faith to be for their own 
benefit, but that they had no right to do any act in- 
spired by malice toward another person; and that 
word "malice" covers the whole ground when it is 
understood in its legal and not its popular sense. It 
means that no man has a right to do an act not in- 
tended to advance his own interests, but simply to 
cause a wanton injury to another. That in the eye 
of the law is a malicious injury to that other. 

But whether I am right about this or not, there 
can be no question about its being a proper subject 



176 SOME REMINISCENCES 

for legislation. If it is not a wrong at common 
law it is certainly a matter that the legislative 
power can make a wrong and provide redress for. 
To provide effectual legislative redress there must 
be legislation by both Congress and the States. 
The States are powerless to deal with interstate 
commerce and Congress is powerless to deal with 
intrastate commerce. The case requires, therefore, 
State legislation to bring to an end the wrongful 
conduct of the trust that is wholly within the 
boundaries of a State. It also requires Congres- 
sional legislation to bring to an end the wrongful 
conduct of the trust that lives on interstate com- 
merce. I have drawn an act for the States to pass 
and another for Congress to pass. If all the States 
will enact and enforce the act suggested for them 
and Congress will enact and enforce the act sug- 
gested for it, I believe the trust will soon be curbed 
and compelled to confine its operations to legiti- 
mate boundaries, when, instead of being a curse, it 
will become a public blessing. 

I therefore suggest to the States and to Con- 
gress the following acts: 

Act suggested to the States. 

Section i. Be it enacted that it shall be unlawful 
for any person, partnership or corporation to give away in 
this State, any goods, wares, or merchandise manufac- 
tured, created, or grown in this State and not intended 
for commerce with foreign nations or for commerce 



SOME REMINISCENCES 177 

among the several States or with the Indian tribes, or to 
be used in the same, or to sell the same in this State, 
at or below cost or so near to cost as to be in effect a 
sale at or below cost, for the purpose and with the in- 
tention of destroying a rival in business doing business in 
this State, or of driving him out of the business he is 
engaged in in this State. 

Section 2. The courts of equity in this State are 
hereby given power and authority to enjoin any of the 
acts made unlawful by Section I of this act and to grant 
any other proper relief under same, and to that end they 
are authorized to require any person, firm, or corporation 
sued in them under this act to produce their books and 
papers and to answer all lawful questions. 

Section 3. A person injured by any act made un- 
lawful by Section i of this act may sue the party injuring 
him for damages, and the court shall give him judgment 
for three times the amount of what the jury places his 
damages at, and also for a reasonable attorney's fee. 

Section 4. It is hereby made the duty of the attorneys 
for the commonwealth to put this act into force and ef- 
fect, and they are hereby required to bring any suit under 
this act for any party complaining to them which his or 
its case may justify. 

Section 5. Any person, partnership or corporation 
violating the provisions of Section i of this act shall be 
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person or mem- 
ber of a partnership found guilty of such misdemeanor 
shall be punished by fine and imprisonment or fine or im- 
prisonment at the discretion of the court. Any corpora- 
tion found guilty of such misdemeanor shall be fined at 
the discretion of the court. Any officer, agent, or director 
of a corporation knowing that said corporation is violating 
Section i of this act and aiding therein shall, on conviction. 



178 SOME REMINISCENCES 

be fined and imprisoned or fined or imprisoned at the dis- 
cretion of the court. 

Act Suggested to Congress. 

Section i. Be it enacted that it shall be unlawful for 
any person, partnership or corporation to give away any 
goods, wares, or merchandise intended for or used in com- 
merce with foreign nations or intended for use in com- 
merce among the several States or with the Indian tribes, 
or to sell the same at or below cost or so near to cost as 
to be in effect a sale at or below cost for the purpose and 
with the intention of destroying a rival in business or 
driving him out of business. 

Section 2. The circuit courts of the United States 
are hereby given power and authority to enjoin any of 
the acts made unlawful by Section i of this act and to 
grant any other proper relief under same, and to that 
end they are authorized to require any person or corpora- 
tion sued under this act to produce their books and papers 
and to answer all lawful questions. 

Section 3. A person injured by any act made un- 
lawful by Section i of this act may sue the party injuring 
him for damages in the circuit court of the United States 
for the proper district, and the court shall give him judg- 
ment for three times the amount of what the jury places 
his damages at, and also for a reasonable attorney's fee. 

Section 4. It is hereby made the duty of the United 
States district attorneys to put this act into force and ef- 
fect, and they are hereby required to bring any suit under 
this act for any party complaining to them which his or 
its case may justify. 

Section 5. Any person, partnership or corporation 
violating the provisions of Section i of this act shall be 
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person or member 
of a partnership found guilty of such misdemeanor shall 



SOME REMINISCENCES 179 

be punished by fine and imprisonment or fine or impris- 
onment at the discretion of the court. Any corporation 
found guilty of such misdemeanor shall be fined at the 
discretion of the court. Any officer, agent, or director of 
a corporation knowing that said corporation is violating 
Section i of this act and aiding therein shall be deemed 
guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, on conviction, be fined 
and imprisoned or fined or imprisoned at the discretion of 
the court. 

Section 6. No person shall be exempted from the ob- 
ligation to testify concerning violations of the provisions 
of this act upon the ground that his testimony might tend 
to incriminate him. But no person shall be prosecuted 
for any violation of this act who has been required to tes- 
tify concerning violations of it. 

Section 7. This act shall be in force from its pas- 
sage. 

It will be argued that it will be very difiicult, if 
not impossible, to probe into the business affairs of 
a trust so as to find out its violations of these acts. 
But little is worth accomplishing If there is no dif- 
ficulty in accomplishing it. If it is impossible, 
however, a different case is presented. It is not 
impossible. With astute counsel provided by the 
Government to investigate a case, aided by steno- 
graphers and skilled accountants provided by the 
Gov^ernment, and a sufficient fund provided by the 
Government to enable the lawyer to command 
every agency that is necessary, it will be impossible 
for the trust so to conceal its piracies as to avoid 
detection. But suppose it is able to conceal some 



i«o 



SOME REMINISCENCES 



of them. Yet many would be unearthed, and if 
these were punished to the limit of the law, the 
trusts would become so terrorized that they would 
nearly, if not entirely, go out of the game. It is 
possible ♦"here may be no need for State legislation. 
Everything touches interstate commerce in one way 
or another. 

THE HARRIMAN CONTROL 

There is one other branch of this subject which 
should, perhaps, receive some treatment here. Ac- 
cording to the newspaper reports of the investiga- 
tion made by the Interstate Commerce Commission 
Mr. E. H. Harrlman is engaged in a process for 
controlling a great portion, if not all, of the rail- 
roads that may well arouse the astonishment if not 
alarm of the people of this country. According to 
those reports he secured a majority of the stock 
of the Union Pacific Railway and, placing bonds 
upon the company's property, he bought with the 
proceeds of those bonds a majority of the stock of 
the Southern Pacific Railway, and thus controll- 
ing this corporation he placed bonds upon its prop- 
erty, and with the proceeds of these bonds he 
bought a majority of the stock of the Oregon 
Short Line and the Oregon Railway and Naviga- 
tion Company, and, repeating the process with one 
road after another, he acquired control of these 
roads and seven others, until he had absolute do- 



SOME REMINISCENCES i8i 

minion over 25,000 miles of railroad, besides the 
Pacific Mail Steamship Company, the Portland 
and Asiatic Steamship Company, and the steam- 
ship line from New York to New Orleans, 
formerly known as the Morgan Line. Of course 
if Mr, Harriman can lawfully do this he may con- 
tinue the operation until he dominates the entire 
transportation of the United States and Its trans- 
portation to foreign countries also. Do our insti- 
tutions permit one man to acquire such a domina- 
tion as this over the entire commerce of the coun- 
try and to hold it against any legislative or judicial 
attack upon It? If they do there Is some strange 
shortcoming In our Institutions. I, for one, be- 
lieve that such an anomalous situation as this can 
be lawfully controlled and that Mr. Harriman can 
be lawfully forced to release his grip upon the 
country's commerce. 

Upon Mr, Harriman's side It will be said 
the law permitted him to buy a majority of 
the shares of the Union Pacific Railway's stock, 
which gave him a lawful right to place bonds 
upon Its property for any purpose sanctioned by Its 
charter, and one of those purposes was acquiring a 
majority of the stock of the Southern Pacific Rail- 
way, and so on, as he acquired control of each 
subsequent company; that he has simply ac- 
quired property by the exercise of a legal right and 
that It would be spoliation pure and simple to take 



i82 SOME REMINISCENCES 

from him new property that he acquired lawfully. 
That argument is not to be treated lightly. 

In dealing with this subject it is well that we 
should have before our minds the exact facts of 
the Northern Securities Company, the way in 
which the judges of the Supreme Court of the 
United States stood in that case, and what they 
said about it. 

The case was this. A corporation was formed 
under the laws of New Jersey, called the Northern 
Securities Company, without capital (that is, $30,- 
000 was paid into its treasury to meet expenses of 
organization), but capable of issuing stock to al- 
most any extent that might be required. The 
stocls-holders of the Great Northern Railway Com- 
pany and the stockholders of the Northern Pacific 
Railway Company, two immense railway corpora- 
tions that were in active competition with each 
other in Interstate commerce, exchanged their stock 
in these two corporations for shares of stock Issued 
by the Northern Securities Company, and thus this 
company came to own both of the railways and the 
old competition between them was brought to an 
end. The United States attacked this organization 
under the Anti-trust Act as a combination and 
agreement in restraint of interstate trade, through 
ending the former competition between the two 
railways. Mr. Justice Harlan delivered the opin- 
ion of four justices, holding that the transaction 



SOME REMINISCENCES 183 

was a combination in restraint of interstate trade 
and unlawful and void, and Mr. Justice Brewer 
delivered his own opinion in which he concurred in 
the same result. Mr. Justice White delivered a 
dissenting opinion concurred in by Chief Justice 
Fuller and Justices Peckham and Holmes, and Mr. 
Justice Holmes delivered his own dissenting opin- 
ion concurred in by the Chief Justice and Justices 
White and Peckham. 

The court is thus seen to have been very much 
split up in the reasons given, but the important 
fact is that a majority of the judges concurred in 
holding that the transaction was a combination in 
restraint of trade under the Anti-trust Act. Mr. 
Justice Brewer in his concurring opinion seems to 
have anticipated the possibility of just such a thing 
happening as has happened in the Harriman case, 
and while prepared to condemn it at once if it hap- 
pened through the instrumentality of anything like 
the holding company, the Northern Securities 
Company, he seems to be a little tender- footed if 
it happened through an individual acquiring a ma- 
jority of the stock of the several corporations 
through ordinary purchase and sale, as Mr. Har- 
riman has acquired It. Mr. Justice Harlan uses 
language frequently in the course of his opinion 
which would seem to indicate that he and the three 
Justices for whom he spoke were prepared to con- 
demn such a transaction even though accomplished 



i84 SOME REMINISCENCES 

as Mr. Harrlman accomplished it, if its effect was 
to put restraints upon interstate commerce. He 
may not, however, have had such a transaction be- 
fore his mind, but his language looks very much 
as if he did have that identical transaction in view. 
I will quote some of it. At page 354, 193 U. S. 
R., he says, speaking of the holding company: 

However that company may have acquired for itself 
any stock in the Great Northern and Northern Pacific 
Railway Companies, no matter how it obtained the means 
to do so, all the stock it held or acquired in the constituent 
companies was acquired and held to be used in suppressing 
competition between those companies. It came into exis- 
tence only for that purpose. 

The learned judge certainly indicates here that 
he considers the purpose for which the transaction 
was got up of the utmost importance, and it cannot 
be doubted that Mr. Harriman has gone into his 
transaction with the purpose and intention of sup- 
pressing competition between railways engaged in 
interstate commerce which have heretofore been in 
most active competition for that commerce. 

On page 350 he says: 

Whilst every instrumentality of domestic commerce is 
subject to State control, every instrumentality of inter- 
state commerce may be reached and controlled by national 
authority, so far as to compel it to respect the rules for 
such commerce lawfully established by Congress. No 
corporate person can excuse a departure from or violation 



SOME REMINISCENCES 185 

of that rule under the plea that that which it has done or 
omitted to do is permitted and not forbidden by the State 
under whose authority it came into existence. We repeat 
that no State can endow any of its corporations or any 
combination of its citizens with authority to restrain inter- 
state or international commerce or to disobey the national 
will as manifested in legal enactments of Congress. 

On page 347 he says: 

It would seem that the government which represents 
all cases, when acting within the limits of its powers, com- 
pels obedience to its authority. It would mean that no de- 
vice in evasion of its provisions, however skilfully such de- 
vice may have been contrived, and no combination by 
whomsoever formed, is beyond the reach of the supreme 
law of the land if such device or combination, by its opera- 
tion directly restrains commerce among the States or with 
foreign nations in violation of the act of Congress * * * 

In short, the court may make any order necessary to 
bring about the dissolution or suppression of an illegal 
combination that restrains interstate commerce (p. 346). 

There is much more in the opinion to the same 
effect, and it was all said after the judge had 
shown (p. 334) that he had the case of a person 
buying the controlling interest in the stock of a 
railroad corporation or in several railroad corpora- 
tions distinctly before his mind as one of the 
cases In which a device might be got up to effect a 
restraint upon Interstate commerce. 



1 86 SOME REMINISCENCES 

In summing up what the decision of the Su- 
preme Court has established in respect to this 
matter, Mr. Justice Harlan says (p. 332), That 
to vitiate a combmation such as the act of Congress 
condemns, it need not be shown that the combina- 
tion, in fact, results or will result in a total sup- 
pression of trade or in a complete monopoly, but 
it is only essential to show that, by its necessary 
operation, it tends to restrain interstate or inter- 
national trade or commerce or tends to create a 
monopoly in such trade or commerce and to de- 
prive the public of the advantages that flow from 
free competition. 

We have it laid down for the law, then, that no 
device which may be resorted to will close the eyes 
of the court, and prevent its ascertaining just what 
is the true purpose and effect of any transaction 
whatever that touches interstate commerce, and 
that if it finds that in "Its necessary operations it 
tends to restrain interstate or International trade 
or commerce, or tends to create a monopoly in such 
trade or commerce," it is condemned by the law. 
I do not see how Mr. Harriman's transactions can 
stand a moment when subjected to this test. 

And as to the plea that this view would be de- 
priving Mr. Harriman of the full use and enjoy- 
ment of his property, the court would probably 
make the same answer that it made in the Joint 
Traffic Association case to the argument that all 



SOME REMINISCENCES 187 

men have a "liberty" to make any harmless con- 
tract which is protected by the Constitution, "that 
is true, but they hold that right subject to the su- 
perior and supreme right of Congress to regulate 
commerce between the States and with foreign na- 
tions." 

There is still another maxim of the law, the 
application of which to questions of this sort has 
never yet been probed, and that is Salus popiili, 
suprema lex — the safety of the people is the su- 
preme law. That maxim finds expression in the 
preamble to the Constitution of the United States, 
which reads as follows : 

We the people of the United States, in order to form 
a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic 
tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the 
general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to our- 
selves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this con- 
stitution for the United States of America. 

"Promote the general welfare!" The Supreme 
Court never yet has told us what limitations cir- 
cumscribe those words. I have no doubt what- 
ever, in my own mind, that as the safety of the 
people requires those words to be expanded, they 
will grow larger and larger until they take in every 
case where the safety of the people is put in 
jeopardy, and Mr. Harriman's device has put the 
safety of the people in peril. 

But after all, if Congress will pass the act for 



1 88 SOME REMINISCENCES 

controlling the trusts that I have drawn and will 
amend the Sherman law as I suggest farther on, 
the whole subject will be properly regulated and 
we shall have no more trouble of any consequence. 

In conclusion I desire to say that in my judg- 
ment it Is a great pity President Roosevelt devoted 
so much of his energies to getting Congress to 
pass the rate bill. The people were not complain- 
ing of rates, for they were not so high as to cause 
discontent. But the people were complaining bit- 
terly of rebates granted by the railroads and of 
unjust discriminations made by the railroads, and 
of the oppressions and injustices of the trusts. 

If the President had devoted his great talents 
and energies to getting Congress to give the people 
relief In these matters he would have performed 
one of the greatest public services ever performed 
by a ruler. 

It Is not possible for the Interstate Commerce 
Commission to regulate interstate rates. There 
Is competition between all interstate lines, and com- 
petitors and competition alone can regulate those 
rates. These Interstate rates depend upon so many 
thousands of different considerations that skilled 
men such as the railroads have are the only men 
on earth who can regulate them. A commission 
is as Incapable of dealing with them properly as it 
is of regulating the tides. The interstate rates, 



SOME REMINISCENCES 189 

therefore, should have been left to competition, and 
Congress has no power to deal with the Intrastate 
rates. They must be dealt with by the State com- 
missioners. Every word, therefore, of the Hep- 
burn bill that deals with the regulation of Inter- 
state rates Is vicious In Its tendencies; but every 
word In It that seeks to destroy rebates and dis- 
criminations Is vital and valuable. 

SHERMAN ANTI-TRUST LAW 

This act In Its present state Is the most vicious 
piece of legislation that ever came from a law- 
maker's hand. It deals with the most Intricate 
and Important relations of life and required for 
Its draftsman one familiar with Mr. Darwin's 
"Orgin of Species" and the principles of evolution. 
But I doubt If Its author, whoever he may be, 
ever had the slightest familiarity with either. The 
act condemns "every" restraint upon trade, and the 
Supreme Court says It Is powerless to modify that 
language and that the Inferior courts must carry 
the act out literally. 

But If the draftsman of the act had had any sort 
of appreciation of the subject he would have 
known that there can be no trade at all unless re- 
strictions are put upon some sort of trade some- 
where. I go Into partnership with Jones to export 
tobacco from Richmond, Virginia. Jones Is much 
addicted to dealing In stocks and I make him agree 



I90 SOME REMINISCENCES 

that he will cease dealing in stocks and give his 
undivided attention to our business. We have 
put a restriction upon trading in stocks but we 
have greatly aided the export tobacco trade. And 
so it is. There is no co-operative business that 
does not put some sort of restraint upon some sort 
of trade somewhere. 

In the case of the United States against the 
American Tobacco Company, decided by the 
United States Circuit Court in New York City in 
November, 1908, Lacombe, J., says of this act: 

Every aggregation of individuals or corporations, for- 
merly independent, immediately upon its franchise ter- 
minates an existing competition : whether or not some 
other competition may subsequently arise. The act as 
above construed prohibits "every" contract or combina- 
tion in restraint of competition. Size is not made the test. 
Two individuals who have been driving rival express 
wagons between villages in two contiguous States who 
enter into a combination to join forces and operate a single 
line restrain an existing competition, and it would seem 
to make little difference whether they make such com- 
bination more effective by forming a partnership or not. 

The American Tobacco Company is made up of 
a great many subsidiary companies that it has ac- 
quired and incorporated with itself through which 
it does an immense business, employing many 
thousands of agents. All of these subsidiary com- 
panies did business in competition with each other 



SOME REMINISCENCES 191 

before they were acquired by the American 
Tobacco Company. When the decree came to be 
framed it enjoined each of these subsidiary 
companies from doing any more business until it 
was shown to the court that the competition that 
formerly existed between them had been restored. 
This wiped out hundreds of millions of dollars of 
property and ended one of the greatest businesses 
of the country by the stroke of a pen. If this is 
to be the law of the land, then all co-operative 
business is ended. 

When, therefore, the draftsman of the Sherman 
law forbade "every" restraint upon trade he ought 
to have known that he was killing trade and 
arraying the laws of Congress against the laws of 
nature. 

What then should have been the principle 
governing the draftsman of that act? He should 
first of all have been a student of Darwin and 
have understood the principles of evolution. He 
should have understood the preceding principles 
governing purpose and intention and he should 
have understood that the principles of evolution 
do not condemn the destruction of a person by 
fair competition, but that they inexorably justify 
It. He should have known that all they condemn 
is wanton destruction from a bad motive. He 
should have known that the destruction which fair 
competition brings about Is that inexorable destruc- 



192 SOME REMINISCENCES 

tlon which we mean when we speak of the survival 
of the fittest, the foundation upon which all nature 
rests. He should have known that as this is the 
foundation on which evolution rests it is the 
natural right of the citizen to make any agreement 
whatever with another citizen to do anything that 
will advance his interests, that is not intended to do 
a wanton injury to another, even if it destroys 
that other through fair competition, and that that 
natural right is therefore one of the "liberties" that 
the Constitution intends to secure to the citizen. 
He should have known therefore that when he 
forbade "all restraints" upon trade that he was 
laying the axe at the root of trade, that he was 
depriving the citizens of their natural "liberties" 
that are necessary for progressive civilization, and 
that he was arraying an act of Congress against 
the laws of nature. 

What then should have been the first sentence 
of his law? It should have forbidden all agree- 
ments to impose unreasonable restraints upon trade 
and all agreements that sought to do a wanton 
injury to another and have stopped there, whereby 
the people would have been left free to im- 
pose those restraints upon trade that the ex- 
perience of men have shown to be necessary to 
trade, and they would have been left free to make 
all those combinations necessary to co-operative 
business; but would have been forbidden to put 



SOME REMINISCENCES 193 

in operation those vicious aims that are not in- 
tended for their own benefit, but only for the 
wanton destruction of their fellow-citizens. 
Those practices are what the great trusts live on. 
They cannot beat the small dealer if they are pre- 
vented from killing him by wanton injuries to 
him. They have to earn dividends upon a great 
mass of water while he has to earn on solid gold 
dollars alone. If they are left to fair competition 
the independent will beat the trust all the time. 
The law should be amended now, in accordance 
with these views, providing, however, that rail- 
roads and other public service corporations should 
not be allowed to enter into agreements that put 
restraints upon trade without the consent of the 
Interstate Commerce Commission. A wide line 
of demarcation should be drawn between corpora- 
tions engaged in private business and railroads and 
other public service corporations. The corpora- 
tions engaged in private business should be dealt 
with from the standpoint discussed. The railroad 
and other public service corporations should be held 
under the restraining hand of government. 

It ought to be plain now where the financial 
panic of 1907 came from. The President put the 
Sherman trust law into effect according to its terms, 
as he should hav^e done. The holders of stock in 
industrial corporations that were doing perfectly 
legitimate business said to themselves, if he is go- 

13 



194 SOME REMINISCENCES 

Ing to enforce that law according to Its terms he 
will destroy my corporation along with the others. 
I am going to sell out while I can. This brought 
all the stock into the market at once. But the same 
influence that made the owner want to sell operated 
on the mind of the buyer to keep him from buying, 
consequently, all were sellers and there were no 
buyers, and the market sagged on down lower and 
lower until the condition of panic arose, and if the 
law remains as it is and in enforced literally as it 
should be, there will be many more panics in the 
future. 

Fmally, it is my deliberate belief that if this 
subject is ever brought properly before the Su- 
preme Court there will be such a modification of 
what has been done as will give the country relief. 
If it is not, then Congress must so modify the Sher- 
man law as to make it tolerable. It is intolerable 
now. 



CHAPTER V 

FREE SILVER AND POLITICS 

Toward the end of the State debt fight, Page 
McCarty (the same man who fought the duel) 
started a debt-paying daily paper in Richmond 
called The Times. A gentleman of large means 
in Richmond, named Joseph Bryan, got so far 
drawn into this enterprise that it resulted in his 
coming to own the paper. In 1890 he offered me 
the place of editorial writer for The Times. 
Whilst I was conducting the State debt fight it had 
been one of the terms of my contract with my 
clients that I should devote myself exclusively to 
their business, so that when the contest ended I 
was entirely without a clientelle. I accepted Mr. 
Bryan's offer and became sole editorial writer for 
The Times. 

The "free silver" issue was just then developing, 
so that I had a noble theme to devote myself to, and 
I went into that contest, against free silver, with 
all my heart and soul. It was my business to 
watch all the currents of opinion, and I looked 
over many newspapers each day to see how they 
were setting. When Mr. Cleveland sent his 
Venezuela message to Congress I was satisfied free 



196 SOME REMINISCENCES 

silver was practically dead. The country was re- 
covering from the disastrous panic of 1893 and the 
clamor of the pessimist was no longer attended to. 
But this red rag shaken in Great Britain's face 
changed everything. The business interests of the 
whole countiy were then thrown into the most 
violent panic. All the ground that had been re- 
covered was lost and pessimism became the con- 
dition everywhere. William J. Bryan arose out of 
the conditions brought about by Mr. Cleveland's 
Venezuela message. From the day that message 
went into Congress free silver began to take on 
a new life until it grew to the proportions that we 
saw in 1896. 

What could have induced Mr. Cleveland to do 
anything so foolish? It was done just as he came 
back from one of his duck-hunts. 

In one of the debates which followed Senator 
Ben Hill's assault In the Senate on Mahone's de- 
mocracy Senator Don Cameron of Pennsylvania, 
who was a great friend and advocate of Mahone, 
came rushing from the restaurant and pitched head- 
long into the discussion in an utterly Irrelevant and 
wholly disconnected way. A reporter of the New 
York World, In giving an account of It, said, 
"Something he had eaten had turned his face very 
red." I have always thought that something Mr. 
Cleveland had eaten on that duck-hunt had upset 
his usually sound judgment. But whether this be 



SOME REMINISCENCES 197 

true or not, Mr. Cleveland turned the trick. He 
created the free silver of 1896. 

I will digress a little at this point to tell some 
incidents connected with Mr. Cleveland. All the 
world knows his passion for fishing. A gentle- 
man named Harrison has a fine trout stream near 
Leesburg, Virginia. Some time after he had com- 
pleted his great fight against free silver, in which 
every Senator and Representative from Virginia 
had opposed him, Mr. Cleveland paid Mr. Har- 
rison a visit to fish his trout stream. In the middle 
of the day, when they suspended fishing for a 
julep and luncheon, Mr. Cleveland said, "Har- 
rison, these Virginians are an open, frank, out- 
spoken people that I like. But, in the name of 
common sense, where do they get their public men 
from?" 

As every one knows, the Honorable Grover could 
be a gentleman of very bad manners when he set 
his mind that way. In 1886 or 1887 I had a 
most excellent opportunity for finding that out. 
Some well-meaning, but ill-advised parties who 
thought they might intervene and procure an ad- 
justment between the State and her creditors got up 
a scheme for having Mr. Cleveland, Mr. Bayard, 
and one or two others thrust themselves in between 
the two and try to bring about a settlement. Mr. 
Cleveland was immensely popular in Virginia at 
that time, and I thought if the movement was ju- 



198 SOME REMINISCENCES 

diciously guided something might be made to come 
of it, but, directed by the parties who had charge of 
it I saw nothing but disaster to all concerned. I 
determined, therefore, to go to New York and see 
Mr. Cleveland and try to get him to act according 
to my advice. He was then a member of a law 
firm of which Hon. Wayne McVeagh, of Pennsyl- 
vania, whom I knew very well, was also a member. 
I went to the office and asked him to introduce me 
to Mr. Cleveland and say a few words in behalf 
of my project to him. McVeagh said, "No, go 
and introduce yourself and your scheme to him; 
you will find him most approachable, and he does 
not like introductions." I went to his office, but 
Mr. Cleveland was not there, and I left my card 
saying I would return later. 

In an hour I returned and was shown into his 
office. He was seated at his desk with my card 
before him, resting against the ink-stand, and his 
head resting upon his arms which were folded on 
the desk. After introducing myself and being re- 
ceived with a grunt that offended me at the outset, 
I told him why I had called. He growled out a 
few words with a manner that indicated he felt no 
interest in me or my mission, and would be glad 
if I would go out as soon as possible. I fired up 
at this and said to him something to the effect that 
I should not allow his bad manners to deter me 
from explaining the duty I had come there to per- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 199 

form. I said, "Mr. Cleveland, unless you give 
proper attention to this very important matter, 
your great name will become involved in what will 
become a scandal," He grunted out something 
about being able to take care of his good name, by 
which time I was in a rage. Turning on him I 
said something to the effect that he and his name 
might go to the bad place as far as I was concerned, 
and I stalked out of his office. I spoke of the 
interview freely and the Southern residents of New 
York took it up and discussed it freely. In conse- 
quence a reporter of the Baltimore Sun called on 
Mr. Cleveland and asked him about it. The Sun 
stated that he said he did not take in the situation 
or appreciate my relation to the subject. To a 
friend of mine he said that I was under the influence 
of liquor, which was not a fact, and I was sur- 
prised that any one so conversant with such mat- 
ters as Mr. Cleveland was should have fallen into 
that error. 

It must not be supposed that I am inimical to 
Mr. Cleveland. Upon the contrary, he did this 
country, in my opinion, two of the greatest pieces 
of service ever rendered it, when he whipped free 
silver and suppressed the Chicago riots, — and the 
country should be forever grateful to him for those 
two services.* 

*This was written during Mr. Cleveland's life, but I let it 
stand. 



200 SOME REMINISCENCES 

I return now to free silver. 

I fought free silver in The Times with all 
the energies of my nature, and we had a following 
in the State which was far greater than any one 
would suppose who judged by the election returns 
of November, 1896, between Bryan and McKinley. 
To make this understood I must go back a little. 
When Mahone got complete possession of the State 
he set up one of the most infamous governments 
that any people ever had to live under. Judges 
Claiborne and Mays, as before related in this work, 
will serve to indicate the character of the govern- 
ment that Mahone imposed upon the people of 
Virginia. All regard for decency and morality was 
discarded, and the government of the State became 
little more than an organization for plunder. 

In the fall of 1883 a new Legislature was 
elected and the white people of the State, roused 
to such a fury as the people of Virginia have never 
been roused to, determined to elect a majority of 
the Legislature at all cost. I have never seen a 
people so united and so resolved as the white 
people of Virginia were at that election. Just be- 
fore the day of election the intense strain gave 
way in Danville and there was a riot between the 
whites and the blacks. It has never been known 
how many negroes were killed in this riot, but it 
was a fearful experience. I was living in New 
York when the day of election came on, but I had 



SOME REMINISCENCES 201 

retained my citizenship in Virginia and 1 came to 
Richmond to vote. Business was suspended for 
the day, and there was something in the air that 
made every one feel that we were in the presence of 
some overpowering and tremendous event. About 
the middle of the day I was sitting in the Rich- 
mond Club with some thirty-five or forty young 
men and we were discussing the progress of events. 
Presently I said, "Gentlemen, I don't care who 
knows it, I am armed," and I pulled out a large 
Colt's revolver. There was a sort of smile went 
around, and first one, then another, pulled out a 
pistol, and soon it appeared that every man in the 
room was armed. I tremble still to think what 
would have been the consequence if a riot had been 
started that day in Richmond, for the whole popu- 
lation was armed and ready for a riot. 

The white people carried the election and came 
into control of both bodies of the Legislature. 
They thereupon determined that they would never 
run the risk of falling under negro domination 
again, and they accordingly amended the election 
laws so that the officers of election, if so inclined, 
could stuff the ballot boxes and cause them to make 
any returns that were desired. Under these statutes 
the elections in Virginia became a farce. We got 
rid of negro government, but we got in place of it 
a government resting upon fraud and chicanery, 
and it very soon became a serious question which 



202 SOME REMINISCENCES 

was worse, a negro government or a white govern- 
ment resting upon stuffed ballot boxes. 

This condition of affairs had become so gener- 
ally known that Mr. Hanna, chairman of the Re- 
publican National Committee, had determined to 
make no fight in Virginia in the election of 1896, 
but to let the State go for Bryan by default. 
Early in September two leading Republicans in 
Virginia, Edmund Waddill, who was appointed 
by Mr. McKinley United States Judge for the 
Eastern District of Virginia, and Col. Jos. P. 
Brady, who was appointed by Mr. McKinley Col- 
lector of Revenue for the Eastern District of Vir- 
ginia, came to me and asked me to go with them 
to New York to see Mr. Hanna and ask him to 
send the necessary funds into Virginia to make a 
contest there in the coming election. The Times' 
fight for the gold standard had produced an Im- 
pression, and we had a considerable following 
ready to split with the so-called Democratic party 
on the question of free silver. 

I went with these gentlemen to New York, and 
saw Mr. Hanna at the Waldorf-Astoria. He said 
right off, in the most positive way, that the elec- 
tions in Virginia were all fraudulent, that they 
would cheat him out of any vote that he got, and 
that he would not, therefore, send a dollar there 
or take any part in the contest there. I then asked 
him to give me a hearing, and he very courteously 



SOME REMINISCENCES 203 

did so. The Important thing that I told him, the 
thing that impressed him most, was that we, the 
gold-standard men, had a real and important fol- 
lowing and that we worked against and would 
have men at the polls to prevent cheating. Upon 
my representations on this head, he finally agreed 
to make a fight in Virginia, and a fine fight was 
made there by the Republican party. I don't know 
how much money was sent there, but I have heard 
it was as much as $160,000. Further, we got 
up a Palmer and Buckner organization and Mr. 
Hanna gave that great assistance. I thought, 
therefore, that we had a very fair chance to carry 
the State for the gold standard; but when the 
election came off it was found that all the money 
that had been spent had just as well have been 
thrown in the Potomac River. In the white coun- 
ties, where the white people would not allow them- 
selves to be cheated, McKinley beat Bryan in many 
of them and ran up with him in all the others. 
But in the negro counties (all the negroes voting 
the Republican ticket), Bryan got overwhelming 
majorities and thus carried the State by about 20,- 
000 votes. If the vote had been counted as cast, 
McKinley would have carried the State by a large 
majority. 

The greatest blunder that was ever made by a 
political party was the act of the Republican party 
directly after the war in conferring upon all the 



204 SOME REMINISCENCES 

negroes the right to vote. It takes but a small 
portion of degenerate white men in any Southern 
State, added to the whole mass of the negroes, to 
make a majority of the votes in the State. The 
white people of a Southern State simply cannot 
submit to a government founded on the negro 
vote. They will suffer extermination before they 
will submit to it, and any Northern community of 
white men would do the same. In giving the 
negro the vote the Republican party attempted to 
do something which is simply impossible and it 
has received absolutely no returns for the foolish 
act. 

But this it has done. The white people of the 
South are naturally the most conservative and law- 
abiding people in the world. Let alone, they 
would never ally themselves with free silver or 
any other unsound fad. Not only so, but there is 
a very large element amongst them, descendants 
of the old Whigs, and protective tariff men, which 
has a strong penchant for the Republican party. 
If there had been no negro question in the South 
to force all the white men to stand together as one 
man, long before this there would have been a 
reputable Republican party in every Southern State 
that would have contested the control of each with 
fair, if not even, chances to win. Indeed, I believe 
that each Southern State would before this have 
been controlled by the Republican party. In giv- 



SOME REMINISCENCES 205 

ing the whole negro population the right to vote 
the Republican party therefore inflicted upon the 
white people of the South the most horrible curse 
that any people ever suffered from, and they killed 
their own goose of the golden egg. 

I am happy to say that in Virigina we have, by 
constitutional provisions, so eliminated the bad 
elements of the suffrage, both white and black, that 
fraudulent elections are pretty well ended and we 
have a perfectly sound government in all respects. 
I am happy to believe, too, that my editorial ar- 
ticles in The Times aroused the moral elements in 
the State and brought them together to demand 
and secure the abandonment of frauds in elections. 

With one more incident in my life I shall close 
these reminiscences. 

In 1907 The Neale Publishing Company, of 
New York and Washington, published for me a 
small volume entitled "A History of Virginia 
Banks and Banking Prior to the Civil War, with 
an Essay Upon the Banking System Needed." 
The prevalent notion about the State Banks that 
the old long-settled States had prior to 1861 is 
very erroneous. Virginia had one of the best (if 
not the best) banking systems that ever existed, 
and I have given a full account of it in the volume 
referred to. But the most valuable part of it, if 
it has any value, is a discussion in the third chapter 



2o6 SOME REMINISCENCES 

of the elementary principles involved in money and 
banking. 

My intercourse with men has taught me that a 
very great proportion of them think that com- 
merce — trade — is carried on by exchanging money, 
coins or currency notes — for commodities. This is 
another error and one that is productive of the 
most injurious consequences. Commerce, in its 
large sense, is nothing but the exchange by one 
locality of its surplus commodities for the surplus 
commodities of another locality. The said ex- 
change is effected by transferring upon the books of 
the banks the dollar values of each commodity in 
the form of credits. Thus, Jones, in the city of 
Richmond, Virginia, buys 10,000 pounds of cotton 
at 10 cents a pound — $1,000 — from Thompson, 
of Wilmington, North Carolina. Jones sends 
Thompson his check on the First National Bank 
of Richmond for $1,000. Smith, of Wilmington, 
buys 10,000 pounds of bacon from Dixon of Rich- 
mond at 10 cents a pound — $1,000 — and sends 
him his check on the First National Bank of Wil- 
mington in payment. Thompson deposits Jones's 
check In the First National Bank of Wilmington 
and it sends the check to the First National Bank 
of Richmond for collection that Is under an order 
for the latter bank to send $1,000 In money to the 
Wilmington bank. On the day that check gets to 
the Richmond bank, Dixon deposits Smith's check 



SOME REMINISCENCES 207 

in it which was an order for the Richmond bank 
to send it to the Wilmington bank, with directions 
that the Wilmington bank should send to Rich- 
mond $1,000 in money. But the Richmond bank, 
on looking into the case, asks, Why go through 
all this tom-foolery of sending $1,000 to Wilming- 
ton and bringing $1,000 from Wilmington here? 
We will settle the matter thus — we will take the 
credit on our books for $1,000 which Jones has, 
and transfer it to the credit of Dixon, and thus he 
will get paid for his bacon; and we will send 
Smith's check hack to the Wilmington bank and tell 
it to transfer the $1,000 credit on its books that 
Smith has to the account of Thompson, and thus 
Thompson will be paid for his cotton. 

This is done, the transaction is closed up to the 
satisfaction of every one, and not a dollar of money 
has been used in it. The thing at bottom was 
nothing but an exchange of some bacon that Rich- 
mond had no use for, for some cotton that Wil- 
mington had no use for, effected by exchanging the 
dollar value of the commodities on the books of 
the banks by transferring credits on those books 
from one person to another. This is commerce. 
If ninety-nine transactions in every one hundred in 
commerce were run down to the bottom they would 
be found to be in substance the Richmond and 
Wilmington transaction. 

Now the part that the dollar plays in these trans- 



2o8 SOME REMINISCENCES 

actions is the all-important one, and it is the point 
that the great body of the people are absolutely 
ignorant on, and from their ignorance on it has 
proceeded the awful financial disasters that the 
country has suffered from. 

Bearing in mind the main proposition that com- 
merce is exchanging one commodity for another, 
how are we to get a basis for those exchanges? 
How is a man to know the number of bushels of 
wheat that are to be given for a certain number of 
bushels of corn, or how many pounds of cotton are 
to be given for a certain number of pounds of 
bacon? To determine this there must be a third 
agency, and this third agency we call "the dollar." 

The United States Government has enacted by 
law that 25 8-10 grains of gold, 9-10 fine, shall be 
"the dollar," and that it shall be the standard of 
value. It could have called it a "sequin" or any- 
thing else, but it chose to call it a "dollar." Ac- 
cordingly, all men Interested In wheat got together 
and determined that in the state of demand for 
and supply of wheat, one bushel of wheat was the 
equal in value of 25 8-10 grains of gold, 9-10 fine. 
In the then state of demand for and supply of gold. 
Mark this statement well, for It is at the bottom 
of the whole business and of all commerce. Then 
all the men Interested In corn got together and de- 
termined that in the then state of the supply of 
and demand for corn two bushels of corn were 



SOME REMINISCENCES 209 

the equal in value of 25 8-10 grains of gold, 9-10 
fine, in the then state of demand for and supply of 
gold. It was to say that a bushel of wheat was 
at that time worth a dollar, and that a bushel of 
corn was at that time worth fifty cents. That 
being established we had a basis for exchanging 
wheat for corn. 

Now of course It Is a mere figure of speech to 
say that all these men "got together." The Idea 
I Intend to convey Is that the price established 
Is the result of the codification of opinions by the 
law of supply and demand. The value of the 
dollar then is established by comparing the gold 
in it with a commodity under the law of supply 
and demand. It has been much contended in high 
quarters that the value of the dollar depends 
upon the labor required to produce It. But you 
may put any amount of labor upon the production 
of the gold in a dollar, but if there Is no demand 
for the gold, it will have no value. The value of 
the dollar, as the value of anything else, depends 
upon the law of supply and demand. 

This great fact Is now to be noted. The Im- 
portance of the dollar is not, as generally believed, 
as a purchasing agency, but as a standard of value 
for creating a basis on which commodities may be 
exchanged. When that basis Is established busi- 
ness has little further use for the dollar. Business 
carries itself along after that by exchanging com- 

14 



2IO SOME REMINISCENCES 

modities by transferring their credit values upon 
the books of the banks. 

It is absolutely necessary, for a stable currency, 
and for peace and order in business, that these 
and their cognate principles should be under- 
stood by the voters of the nation; and yet it is 
my opinion, judging from my own experience in 
my contact with men, that there is not one man in 
one thousand that understands them. In my re- 
cent book, "A History of Virginia Banks and 
Banking," I have undertaken to explain and illus- 
trate these principles in a way that will enable the 
simplest and plainest citizen to understand them. 
If I could only feel that this explanation will be 
conveyed to the great mass of the voters so as to 
end all chance of a future William J. Bryan, I 
should feel that I had not lived in vain. 



630 



